You are what you wear: The examination of fashion .../67531/metadc... · Angelo, Davette. You are what you wear: The examination of fashion leadership and general leadership among

APPROVED:

Tammy Kinley, Major Professor and Chair of

the Division of Merchandising Christy Crutsinger, Committee Member Bharath M. Josiam, Committee Member Judith C. Forney, Dean, School of

Merchandising and Hospitality Management

Michael Monticino, Dean of the Robert B. Toulouse School of Graduate Studies

YOU ARE WHAT YOU WEAR: THE EXAMINATION OF FASHION LEADERSHIP

AND GENERAL LEADERSHIP AMONG AFRICAN AMERICAN AND CAUCASIAN

AMERICAN COLLEGE STUDENTS.

Davette Angelo, B. S.

Thesis Prepared for the Degree of

MASTER OF SCIENCE

UNIVERSITY OF NORTH TEXAS

May 2010

Angelo, Davette. You are what you wear: The examination of fashion leadership

and general leadership among African American and Caucasian American college

students. Master of Science (Merchandising), May 2010, 88 pp., 11 tables, 4 figures,

references, 89 titles.

The purpose of this study was twofold. First, the study compared fashion

personality characteristics and shopping behaviors of African-American and Caucasian-

American college students. Secondly, this study examined characteristics of leadership

in general, and fashion leadership specifically, on fashion personality characteristics.

The fashion personality characteristics studied included fashion leadership, fashion

involvement, shopping enjoyment, and fashion consciousness.

The participants consisted of 268 African Americans and 239 Caucasian

Americans from two universities in the United States. Ethnicity was found to be an

influence on fashion personality characteristics and shopping behaviors in this study.

African Americans in the sample were found to have higher levels of fashion personality

characteristics and shopping behaviors than Caucasian Americans. Fashion leadership

was found to be positively related to general leadership, fashion involvement, shopping

enjoyment and fashion consciousness. General leadership was found to be positively

related to fashion involvement, shopping enjoyment, fashion consciousness, academic

classification level. However, there was no significant difference found between general

leadership and age.

ii

Copyright 2010

by

Davette Angelo

iii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

While completing my master’s degree and my thesis I have received continuous

support from many people. I would like to acknowledge Dr. Josiam for introducing this

topic in his research methods class and encouraging my efforts to expand it. In addition

I would like to thank my thesis advisor, Dr. Tammy Kinley, for helping me to define and

maintain my research agenda and writing. I would also like to thank Dr. Christy

Crutsinger not only for serving as one of my thesis committee members but also for

assisting me with other research efforts and celebrating all of my accomplishments at

the University of North Texas.

Special thanks are also due to the faculty at Texas Southern University for

supporting my research by opening up their classrooms to administer my

questionnaires. It is because of their participation that what began as an idea came to

fruition, and they provided continuous encouragement to me to complete this research

project.

Lastly, I would like to thank my family for their never-ending support throughout

all of my educational pursuits. To my late grandmother, Mable A. Benson, thank you for

beginning a legacy of education that I will continue and to my late grandfather, Earlee

Benson, thank you for beginning a legacy of Historically Black University graduates. To

my mother, who always listened to my triumphs and my trials and to my father, who

made me realize that life is a gift to be lived every day as though it were my last. To my

extended family, the University of North Texas Black Graduate Students Association,

you guys helped to complete my graduate school experience.

iv

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ............................................................................................... iii

LIST OF TABLES ........................................................................................................... vii

LIST OF FIGURES ........................................................................................................ viii

Chapter

I. INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................................... 1

Purpose ........................................................................................................................... 2

Rationale ..................................................................................................................... 2

Research Models ......................................................................................................... 4

Hypotheses .................................................................................................................. 6

Definition of Terms ....................................................................................................... 8

Assumptions ................................................................................................................ 9

Limitations ................................................................................................................. 10

II. LITERATURE REVIEW ............................................................................................. 11

Ethnicity ..................................................................................................................... 11

Additional Variables Contributing to Consumer Behavior .......................................... 15

Fashion Leadership ................................................................................................... 16

Fashion Involvement .................................................................................................. 21

Shopping Enjoyment .................................................................................................. 25

Fashion Consciousness ............................................................................................. 28

General Leadership ................................................................................................... 30

Shopping Behavior .................................................................................................... 34

v

Summary ................................................................................................................... 37

III. METHODOLOGY ..................................................................................................... 39

Sample ...................................................................................................................... 39

Research Instrument ................................................................................................. 39

Modifications for Final Instrument .............................................................................. 40

Final Instrument ......................................................................................................... 40

Instrument Variables .................................................................................................. 41

Fashion Leadership ................................................................................................ 41

General Perception of Leadership.......................................................................... 41

Shopping Enjoyment .............................................................................................. 42

Fashion Consciousness ......................................................................................... 42

Personal Involvement Inventory ............................................................................. 43

Demographics ........................................................................................................... 43

Procedure for Collecting Data .................................................................................... 44

Data Analysis ............................................................................................................. 44

IV. RESULTS ................................................................................................................ 46

Description of Sample ................................................................................................ 46

Instrument Scales ...................................................................................................... 48

Fashion and General Leadership Personality Characteristics ................................ 48

Shopping Behavior ................................................................................................. 50

Reliability of Instrument ............................................................................................. 54

Analysis of Hypotheses ............................................................................................. 55

H1: Ethnicity and Fashion Personality Characteristics ........................................... 55

vi

H2: Ethnicity and Shopping Behavior ..................................................................... 57

H3: The Influence of Fashion Leadership .............................................................. 59

H4: General Leadership, Fashion Personality Characteristics and

Demographics ........................................................................................................ 61

V. DISCUSSION ........................................................................................................... 64

Summary of the Study ............................................................................................... 64

Conclusions ............................................................................................................... 65

Implications ................................................................................................................ 71

Recommendations for Future Studies ....................................................................... 73

Appendix

A. LETTER TO PARTICIPANTS ................................................................................... 75

B. LETTER FROM UNIVERSITY OF NORTH TEXAS .................................................. 78

C. LETTER FROM TEXAS SOUTHERN UNIVERSITY ................................................ 80

REFERENCE LIST........................................................................................................ 82

vii

LIST OF TABLES

Table Page

1. Hypotheses and Tests ............................................................................................... 45

2. Sample Demographics .............................................................................................. 47

3. Statistics for Fashion Personality Characteristics and General Leadership .............. 48

4. Frequencies of Shopping Behaviors .......................................................................... 51

5. Mean Scores for Comfort Level of Purchases, Expenditure and

Time Spent Shopping .................................................................................................... 52

6. Cronbach’s Alpha Reliability of Survey Scales .......................................................... 54

7. The Influence of Ethnicity on Fashion Personality Characteristics: t-test Results ..... 57

8. The Influence of Ethnicity on Shopping Behaviors: t-test Results ............................. 58

9. The Influence of Ethnicity on Shopping Behaviors: χ² Results .................................. 59

10. Pearson Product Moment Correlations for Fashion Leadership and General

Leadership, Fashion Involvement, Shopping Enjoyment, Fashion Consciousness,

Academic Classification Level, and Age ........................................................................ 60

11. Pearson Product Moment Correlations for General Leadership and Fashion

Involvement, Shopping Enjoyment, Fashion Consciousness, Age, and Academic

Classification Level........................................................................................................ 62

viii

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure Page

1. The effect of ethnicity on fashion personality characteristics and

shopping behavior. .......................................................................................................... 5

2. Research Model II. ...................................................................................................... 6

3. Ethnicity’s relationship to fashion personality characteristics and

shopping behaviors. ...................................................................................................... 56

4. Relationship between leadership variables and fashion personality characteristics

and demographics. ........................................................................................................ 61

1

CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION

Ethnicity expressed through personality can serve as a central guide to how a

person behaves. An individual’s personality traits determine the leadership abilities that

one possesses and whether he or she leads or follows in different aspects of life.

Expressive emotional style and consumption patterns are also directed by ethnicity

(Eicher 1995; Lee, Fairhurst & Dillard, 2002).

General leadership combined with ethnicity can affect one’s level of behavior,

motivation, and attitude toward fashion. General leadership is a factor that has been

found to be positively correlated with people who are highly interested in fashion.

Previous research suggests that a fashion leader exercises general leadership traits as

they heavily influence others to wear different fashions, and that they are regarded as

being self-confident and holding power and status (Tatzel, 1982). By contrast, fashion

followers, who comprise the majority of clothing consumers, are the driving force that

sustains the apparel business.

Fashion behavior can differ among ethnic groups. African Americans and

Caucasian Americans have differences in taste and product selections that are heavily

influenced by race (Feather, Ford & Herr, 1997; Shen & Dickson, 2001). For example,

Summers, Belleau and Wozniak (1992) found that involvement was higher in shopping

for clothing for non-Caucasian Americans than for Caucasian Americans. The study

also found that younger, non-Caucasian American unmarried women who were

employed or unemployed are highly involved with fashion. When studying shopping

behavior, characteristics such as age, gender and ethnicity have also been found to be

2

related to the level of involvement among consumers (Summers et al., 1992).

A market segment within these ethnicities that has importance to retailers is

college students, most of whom are Generation Y. College students spend a significant

amount of money on clothing, but Generation Y is characterized as difficult to reach by

retailers through the use of traditional channels of advertising. This is due to the fact

that this group of consumers has access and means to purchase what they want and

when they want, through various retail formats (Sullivan & Heitmeyer, 2008). Further,

members of this generation are more racially and ethnically diverse and are less

homogeneous than other generations (Wilson & Field, 2007).

Purpose

The purpose of this study was twofold. First, the study compared fashion

personality characteristics and shopping behaviors of African American and Caucasian

American college students. Secondly, this study examined the influence of leadership in

general, and fashion leadership specifically, on fashion personality characteristics. The

fashion personality characteristics studied included fashion leadership, fashion

involvement, shopping enjoyment, and fashion consciousness.

Rationale

The majority of research concerning fashion leadership and other psychographic

factors that affect consumer behavior among college students investigates Caucasian

Americans. There is limited literature available that examines African American

consumers in general and their interest in fashion in particular. O’Neal (1998)

recognized that retailers were beginning to target the African American consumer and

that this subculture’s aesthetic preference did not fit Caucasian American ideals of

3

clothing and fashion. O’Neal conducted interviews of African American females and

males to investigate how the African American aesthetic of dress is visible, and the

values and attitudes that are relevant to their aesthetic of dress. Findings indicated that

a higher importance was placed on expressing ethnicity than being traditional and

dressing according to the dominant U.S. aesthetics. McKinney, Legette-Traylor,

Kincade and Holloman (2004) examined social factors and clothing buying behavior of

African American college consumers. Findings of this study indicated that social

participation was related to shopping behaviors. A relationship was found between time

and frequency of clothing purchases and social involvement, fashion involvement and

clothing benefits sought.

Dixon (2007) examined the values and social and psychological factors on dress

and appearance on African American college students. Respondents indicated that all

of the psychological factors studied (self-consciousness, self-confidence, fashion

leadership, shopping enjoyment, and spending behavior) influenced dress and

appearance. Fashion leadership had the strongest influence. In regard to social factors,

media was the best predictor of dress and appearance. According to Norris (2006),

research that has been conducted with African Americans that focused on marketing for

product categories such as automotive manufacturers, financial services, wireless

providers, consumer packaged goods and insurance companies has been the most

insightful.

The majority of available research reports conducted on African Americans as

consumers have been limited by the use of a small sample size, which does not provide

sufficient information to make recommendations for this ethnic group (Miller, 1993a).

4

Miller (1993b) asserts that research providing information on African Americans as

consumers tends to include them as a part of the general market because this group

adapts to Caucasian American ways, despite the fact that there are significant

differences in consumers that are driven by race. Retailers can benefit from information

about the similarities and differences of consumers from these ethnic groups and an

examination of behavior and psychographics can provide understanding in relation to

fashion.

Research Models

A review of the literature yielded limited information with regard to the

relationship between ethnicity and its influence on behaviors related to clothing and

fashion. However, the limited findings that are available have presented differences

when comparing ethnic groups. The following conceptual models were developed

based on a literature review of ethnic differences in shopping behavior.

5

Fashion Leadership

Fashion Involvement

Shopping Enjoyment

Fashion Consciousness

Fashion Personality Characteristics

Ethnicity

Shopping Behaviors

Comfort in Buying Clothing for Self

Frequency of Shopping for Clothing

Frequency of Purchasing Clothing for Self

Money Spent on Clothing for Self

Time Spent on Shopping Trip

Frequency of Returned Clothing Purchases

Figure 1. The effect of ethnicity on fashion personality characteristics and shopping behavior.

6

Figure 2. Research Model II.

Hypotheses

Based on the theoretical models and the review of literature the following

hypotheses were formulated and tested with a sample of African American and

Caucasian American Generation Y college students:

Hypothesis 1: Ethnicity will influence the following fashion personality

characteristics:

a. level of fashion leadership

b. level of fashion involvement

c. amount of shopping enjoyment

7

d. fashion consciousness

Hypothesis 2: Ethnicity will influence the following shopping behaviors:

a. comfort with purchasing clothing for self

b. frequency of shopping for clothing

c. frequency of purchasing clothing for self

d. money spent on clothing for self

e. time spent on a shopping trip

f. frequency of returned clothing purchases

In order to satisfy the second purpose of the study, the following hypotheses

were tested:

Hypothesis 3: Fashion leadership will be positively correlated with:

a. level of general leadership

b. level of fashion involvement

c. amount of shopping enjoyment

d. fashion consciousness

e. age

f: academic classification in college

Hypothesis 4: General leadership will be positively correlated with:

a. level of fashion involvement

b. amount of shopping enjoyment

c. amount of fashion consciousness

d. age

e. academic classification in college

8

Definition of Terms

African American refers to “a person having origins in any of the Black racial

groups of Africa. It includes people who indicate their race as Black, African American,

or Negro, or provide written entries such as African American, Afro American, Kenyan,

Nigerian, or Haitian” (Race Definitions, 2000).

Caucasian American refers to “a person having origins in any of the original

peoples of Europe, the Middle East, or North Africa. It includes people who indicate their

race as "Caucasian American" or report entries such as Irish, German, Italian,

Lebanese, Near Easterner, Arab, or Polish” (Race Definitions, 2000).

Ethnicity was defined as aspects within the individual’s environment contribute to

ethnicity-langauage, culture, and physical appearance (Burkey, 1978, p. 6).

Fashion consciousness is defined as being mutually motivated and highly

capable to shop for one’s own clothing and concerned with what you were wearing. In

addition it is one who has the skill and motivation to shop for clothing. Skills include

being knowledgeable of stores, able to assess merchandise value, understanding of

what is in fashion and aware of what is appropriate to wear and what items look well on

themselves (Tatzel, 1982).

Fashion involvement is the degree that consumers are interested in fashion and

the amount of importance that is placed on the category (McKinney et al., 2004; Park,

Kim, & Forney, 2006).

Fashion leadership is defined as the ability to sway others to accept a new

fashion or style (Stone, 2007).

Fashion personality characteristics consist of the combination of the individual

9

scales that were used in this study to measure fashion attitudes, beliefs, preferences

and opinions which included fashion leadership, fashion involvement, shopping

enjoyment and fashion consciousness.

General leadership consists of an individual’s believed capability to successfully

accomplish something and influence their peers.

Generation Y (Gen Y) consists of those born after 1977 (Bakewell & Mitchell,

2003).

Shopping behavior includes (1) the comfort level with purchasing clothing for self,

(2) the reason and frequency for returning clothing, (3) the frequency of shopping trips,

(4) the frequency personal clothing purchases both in the stores and online, (5) the

motivation for purchasing, and (6) time and expenditure amounts spent when shopping

for clothing. Included, the average amount of money they spend on clothing per month

and average amount of time do they spend on a shopping trip.

Shopping enjoyment is the pleasure of a shopping experience for its own sake,

separate from any product selection/purchase consequence that might result

(Hirschman & Holbrook, 1982; Monsuwe, Dellaert, & Ruyter, 2004; Song, Fiore, & Park,

2007).

Student classification level in college refers to the year of college the respondent

was ranked (i.e., freshman, sophomore, junior or senior).

Assumptions

This research was based on the assumption that there was no significant

difference in the fashion personality characteristics, shopping behaviors, and general

leadership characteristics among African Americans who attend Historically Black

10

Universities (HBU) and those who attend state universities. This research was also

based on the assumption that there was no significant difference in the fashion

personality characteristics, shopping behaviors, and general leadership characteristics

among Caucasian Americans who attend state universities and Historically Black

Universities (HBU).

Limitations

The sample in this study was limited to two schools in the state of Texas.

Therefore, the results cannot be generalized to the entire population of African

Americans and Caucasian Americans.

11

CHAPTER II

LITERATURE REVIEW

This study was developed to compare and contrast the fashion personality

characteristics and shopping behaviors of two ethnic groups: African American and

Caucasian American college students. In addition, this study examined the influence of

fashion leadership on fashion personality characteristics. This literature review presents

findings regarding the effects of ethnicity on fashion personality characteristics, which

included fashion leadership, fashion involvement, shopping enjoyment, and fashion

consciousness. Research regarding general leadership is also presented. The literature

also was summarized regarding shopping behaviors, such as motivation for shopping,

comfort levels of purchasing clothing for one’s self, frequency of shopping for clothing in

general, frequency of shopping for one’s self specifically, frequency of returned clothing

purchases, money spent on clothing for one’s self, and time spent on shopping trips.

Ethnicity

There are many definitions for the term ethnicity. Gordon’s (1964) definition of

ethnicity has been presented in several studies (Forney & Rabolt, 1986; Joseph, 2006;

Ogden, Ogden, & Schau, 2004) as "any group which is defined or set off by race,

religion, or national origin, or some combination of these categories" (p. 27). Gordon

(1964) also indicated that ethnicity has been connected to intrinsic and extrinsic traits

(Forney & Rabolt, 1986). Through one’s ethnicity, intrinsic traits uphold the ethnic

legacy that includes cultural aspects such as religion, historical language, customs, and

traditional practices. An individual’s extrinsic traits include those that can be observed

by others, such as one’s name, accent of language, residential patterns, and dress.

12

Although research suggests that ethnic groups have similarities in consumption of

products, studies also suggest that no entire ethnic group is homogenous, and that

within ethnic groups, there are segments that differ. Forney and Rabolt (1986)

recognized that Americans in general make broad ethnic groupings based on visual

traits that can be simple to observe, such as race. This method of grouping can be

inaccurate as ethnicity has other factors that influence behavior besides race.

Burkey (1978) provided a more detailed definition that refered to three specific

characteristics of ethnicity.

Three significant aspects within the individual’s environment contribute to ethnicity -- langauage, culture, and physical appearance. Generally speaking, the greater the contrasts between two or more collectivies in one or a combination of these conditions, the greater the sense and relevance of ethnicity (p. 6).

Barth (1969) asserted that the differences between groups created the concept

of ethnicity, instead of the similarities of behaviors within a group. Hirschman (2001)

provided a description of ethnicity as a reference to a group that declares a distinct

peoplehood or identity from others.

Previous studies have also discussed the difference between race and ethnicity

(Kretsedemas, 2008; O’Neal, 1998). Ethnicity as a whole defines the group based on

cultural criteria (O’Neal, 1998). Race is a trait represented through the color of one’s

skin and/or a category that is based on physical criteria (Kretsedemas, 2008; O’Neal,

1998). Williams (1995) reviewed the textbook Race and Ethnicity in Research Methods,

edited by John H. Stanfield II and Rutledge M. Dennis (1993), which made an effort to

provide updated, relevant measures and research procedures for race and ethnicity

studies. Williams found that creating categories to identify someone as an individual can

be difficult; however, one of the effective methods to do so is through ethnicity. By using

13

ethnicity as a category, the degree to which members of the same race share the

similar values and cultural orientation can be identified. Williams suggested that

researchers keep in mind that racial and ethnic groups have differences within

themselves. Throughout the present research, references to studies include both race

and ethnicity; however, in this research ethnicity is being used as proxy for race.

Comparison studies in particular highlight the better social scientific work.

Hennon and Brubaker (1988) (as cited in Summers, Belleau, & Wozniak, 1992) stated

that “comparative studies can help generalize, build theory, and provide a broader

database” and expand the database of information for the scientific community.

Previous studies also suggest that ethnicity is a strong influence on consumer

behavior. Research indicates that ethnicity can be used as a predicting variable to

determine differences in clothing preference, shopping behaviors, and fashion

personality characteristics. The use of demographics to describe retail consumers can

greatly assist in evaluating the amount of existing and potential shoppers in market

segments (Summers et al., 1992). According to Kara and Kara (1996), the most

important subcultures are identified through ethnicity, and they indicated that the

commonalities within a subculture or group guide the direction of the behavior of the

group. Kara and Kara (1996) also asserted that young consumers are becoming more

influenced by culture and ethnicity.

Eliminian (2007) studied the beliefs of three ethnicities (African Americans,

Hispanics, Asians) and the level to which their consumption behaviors were similar. The

study also identified the commonalities across ethnicity. The sample for this study

consisted of 40 Asians, 40 African Americans, and 40 Hispanics. Findings indicated that

14

there was a positive relationship between perceived belief similarities within the ethnic

groups. The study also predicted that ethnicity would be less dissimilar to African

Americans than Hispanics and Asians would be to other races. African American

subjects had a stronger ethnic group effect in regard to belief similarity and commonality

than did other ethnicities. However, it must be taken into consideration that the sample

size was limited to 40 subjects per ethnic or racial group and that Caucasian Americans

were not a tested group.

Delener and Neelankavil (1990) indicated that similarities within an ethnic group

could exist because as they are using the same information sources, choosing the

same types of products to suit their particular needs, and shopping at the same types of

stores. For example, Kim and Han (2000) indicated that consumers are more alike

among their ethnic group than across other ethnic groups. The researchers investigated

the differences in the perceived image of the social class that shopped at five retail

stores (JCPenney, Wal-Mart, Dillard’s, Nordstrom, and Macy’s) and three brands

(Polo® [Polo Ralph Lauren Corp., New York, NY, www.ralphlauren.com], Calvin Klein®

[Calvin Klein, Inc., New York, NY, www.calvinklein.com], and Levi’s® [Levi Strauss &

Co., San Francisco, CA, www.levi.com]) among three ethnic groups. The sample

consisted of African American, Korean, and Caucasian American college students.

Koreans and Caucasian Americans within this study believed stores such as

JCPenney to be geared toward those identified as lower-middle class; however, African

Americans believed JCPenney to be geared toward the upper-middle class. Koreans

perceived Dillard’s to be a store for those that were upper-middle, Nordstrom to be one

for those that were considered lower-upper, and Macy’s to be geared toward those

15

between the lower-upper and upper-middle classes. African Americans and Caucasian

Americans in this study perceived the social class for Dillard’s, Nordstrom and Macy’s to

be higher than Koreans. All of the ethnic groups perceived Wal-Mart as a store for

lower-middle and upper-lower classes.

With regard to brands, differences were found in the perception of brand

attributes measured in the study. The Polo® brand was perceived as sexy and

contemporary to African Americans, formal and intelligent to Koreans, and mature to

Caucasian Americans. The Levi’s® brand was found to be perceived as contemporary

and formal to African Americans, and sexy and intelligent to Caucasian Americans. One

difference was found in that African Americans perceived the Calvin Klein® brand to be

more mature than did the Koreans. The researchers suggested that marketing

strategies differ when attempting to reach different ethnic groups as they have varying

perceptions of retail clothing stores and brands. The different perceptions could affect

whether members of an ethnic group accept and purchase products under a particular

brand.

Additional Variables Contributing to Consumer Behavior

Other factors in addition to ethnicity have been found to influence the consumer

behavior of African American and Caucasian American college students. These

influential variables include concepts referred to in this study as fashion personality

characteristics (fashion leadership, fashion involvement, shopping enjoyment and

fashion consciousness) and shopping behavior. The personality trait of general

leadership also has been found to influence the behavior of these ethnic groups.

Studies that incorporated these variables are reviewed.

16

Fashion Leadership

According to Stone (2007), fashions are accepted by a few before they are

accepted by the majority. One who sways others to accept a new fashion or style is

known as a fashion leader. The majority of consumers who follow a fashion leader are

known as non-leaders or as followers. Within a college setting a considerable number of

college students can be categorized as fashion leaders, although larger numbers of

college students fall into the category of fashion followers (Stanforth, 1995). Without

fashion leaders the industry would have difficulties integrating new fashion items into

the market, leaving fashion followers to make purchasing decisions on their own.

Fashion leaders have different characteristics than fashion followers. Although

fashion leadership is typically found in certain demographics it is also found among

those who are not necessarily described as the traditional fashion leader. Summers

(1970) asserted that higher levels of fashion leadership is found in those who are

younger, more educated, have higher incomes, and higher occupational status.

Beaudoin, Moore, and Goldsmith (1998) noted that fashion leaders were likely to spend

more money on apparel, read more fashion magazines, and go shopping more

frequently than followers.

Belleau, Nowlin, Summers, and Xu (2001) examined fashion orientation (leaders

and followers), attitudes and knowledge toward exotic leather apparel products, and

their shopping orientation. Sproles, (1979) identified the eight stages the eight stages

for fashion adoption, which included: awareness, interest, evaluation identification of

alternatives, decision, clothing inventory, usage, and obsolescence. Because the

researchers were examining fashion leadership in regard to a product from a category

17

that they considered less familiar, the sample consisted of fashion professionals

because their work with the fashion industry provided a higher potential for their

awareness of trends. In addition, the fashion professional work environments allowed

them to serve as influencers of consumers. The majority of the sample was Caucasian

American females. Of the participants who completed the questions the majority were

categorized as leaders and the remaining were categorized as followers.

Three hypotheses that were directly related to the characteristics of fashion

leaders were included in this study. It was hypothesized that there would be no

differences between fashion followers regarding their attitudes and product knowledge

of exotic leather apparel. The hypothesis was rejected due the finding that fashion

leaders had a more positive attitude toward exotic leather apparel items than fashion

followers.

It was then hypothesized that fashion leaders and followers will have no

differences in shopping orientations. Shopping orientation included the factors

shopping enjoyment, cost consciousness, traditionalism, practicality, planning, and

following. The hypothesis was partially supported considering the contrasting

relationships found. Fashion leaders enjoyed shopping more than followers, and were

less conscious of price but more traditional and practical than followers. However,

findings for this hypothesis also indicated that there were no differences in the fashion

leaders and followers in planning for shopping and fashion following. The researchers

suggested that fashion leaders were more likely to take on more social risk, and they

were not afraid of being unconventional and impractical in regard to fashion items. Also,

because of the fashion leaders’ higher interest in fashion, they enjoyed shopping more.

18

The last hypothesis that provided data on characteristics of fashion leaders and

followers was that demographics such as age, income, ethnic background, and

occupation would have no influence on fashion leadership. This hypothesis could be

only partially accepted considering that the sample was homogeneous and the only

differentiation between fashion leaders and followers was work status. The fashion

leader in this study was more likely to be a full-time professional in the fashion industry.

Behling (1992) collected and analyzed 20 studies that had been conducted in

regard to fashion adoption. The studies that were reviewed were conducted between

the years 1955 and 1988. Behling (1992) categorized the 20 studies by three common

themes discussed in the studies: leadership, innovativeness, and adoption. Within the

findings of this research, fashion leaders were found to have a significant relationship

with eight demographic variables, which included age, marital status, children,

education, income, socioeconomic level or status, gender, and race. Studies found that

as women increase in age, marry, and start having children their level of fashion

leadership declines.

Generalizations were developed based on the analysis of the 20 studies that

education and income are positively related to being a fashion leader. When

considering gender, males exhibited fewer fashion leadership qualities than did females.

A contrasting finding in regard to race was presented as Caucasian Americans were

found to have a higher level of fashion leadership than African Americans. Behling

(1992) noted that the studies examined used dissimilar samples.

Ethnicity has been found to be a variable that is related to fashion leadership.

The researchers recognized that African Americans sometimes purchase particular

19

brands because they communicate to others their status. Dalrymple, Robertson, and

Yoshino (1971) assessed the rate of adapting to new product categories such as small

appliances, food, and clothing items among three ethnic groups (African Americans,

Caucasian Americans, and Japanese Americans). Within the three ethnic groups high

and low income were used as a divider. Results indicated that income was an

influencing factor on the ability to buy more products, as the higher income participants

were more innovative than others.

Ethnicity was found to influence the innovativeness in regard to new products.

African Americans have been found to sometimes purchase particular brands because

they communicate to others their status (Dalrymple, Robertson, and Yoshino 1971). The

highest in adapting to new items were the Japanese Americans for small appliances,

Caucasian Americans for food products, and African Americans for clothing items.

Findings also indicated that African Americans with higher and lower incomes owned

more new clothing items than the other groups, although there was not a significant

difference. It was also found through interviewing the study’s participants that African

Americans had a higher interest in clothing than the other ethnicities.

Darden and Reynolds (1974) studied males from suburban neighborhoods to

measure demographics, socioeconomic(s), interests, and activities. Questions were

asked regarding innovative behavior toward male personal care products, apparel

fashions, and home care products. This information was then used to create profiles of

male innovators and composed four innovator groups: the suburban swinger, the

established isolates, the suburban conservatives, and the established suburbanites.

The suburban swinger profile of male innovators were found to rate higher than

20

average on apparel innovativeness and personal grooming. However the suburban

sSwingers were lower than average on home care innovativeness. This profile group of

males was found to be self-confident, young, an influence in their community, and highly

interested in obtaining new ideas for clothing. These male participants also scored

higher in regard to apparel innovativeness.

Summers (1970) suggested that the primary purpose of fashion opinion leaders

is to be innovative in fashion. Tat (1984) studied the fashion opinion leadership in

African American females. In this study, opinion leadership in respect to fashion focused

on whether the women considered themselves as persons who would be considered to

give their personal outlook about fashion to others. Thirty-four percent of the sample

was found to be fashion opinion leaders. Many of the activities and interests found

within the opinion leaders were also found in fashion leaders. For example, fashion

opinion leaders were found to be more interested in fashion than non-opinion leaders.

Also, they went to stores and reviewed fashion items and other fashionable women to

get ideas for clothing for themselves. They were also found to be more exposed to

mass media than opinion followers.

Stith and Goldsmith (1989) studied gender and ethnic differences in fashion

innovativeness, fashion opinion leadership, and spending on fashions. The sample

included an even number of both genders, African Americans, and Caucasian

Americans. More than half the sample was married and had at least a college degree.

Significant differences were found between the two ethnic groups, gender, and all three

variables. African American males and females were found to have higher mean scores

of fashion innovativeness, fashion opinion leadership, and spending on new fashions.

21

The study found that age was negatively related to fashion innovativeness, fashion

opinion leadership, and spending on new fashions.

Dixon (2007) studied the social and psychological factors on the dress and

appearance of African American college students. Fashion leadership was one of the

psychological factors examined. Dixon found that the desire to express one’s self-

identity through apparel was the major difference between leaders and followers.

Responses to questions regarding fashion leadership were given through descriptive

data. Of the sample participants who were leaders, more than half said they were

confident in their ability to recognize fashion trends, and almost half said that clothing

was one of the ways to express individuality. In contrast, the research found that more

than half of the sample participants who were followers disagreed that they wanted to

be the first to try a trend, disagreed that they were the first to try a trend therefore

people regarded them as a fashion leader, and said it was not important to be a fashion

leader. According to the researcher, the sample was categorized as having neutral

position on fashion leadership. However, Dixon tested a hypothesis which predicted that

fashion leadership would be the most influential psychological factor on dress and

appearance. To test this hypothesis, multiple regression was used to identify the best

linear combination of the four psychological factors used in the study for predicting

dress and appearance: self-consciousness, self-confidence, fashion leadership, and

shopping enjoyment. Fashion leadership had the highest beta weight of all of the

factors, which indicated that it influenced dress and appearance the most.

Fashion Involvement

Involvement is a concept that measures the amount of relevancy or importance a

22

person perceives with regard to a product category or object (Zaichowsky, 1986). The

amount of importance a consumer perceives the product or object to have determines

whether the consumer is categorized as being involved at a high level or at a low level

(Josiam, Kinley, & Kim, 2005). The degree that consumers are interested in fashion and

the amount of importance that is placed on the category is fashion involvement

(McKinney et al., 2004; Park, Kim & Forney, 2006). Research findings have presented

the involvement construct as a strong predictor of consumer behavior (Fairhurst, Good,

& Gentry, 1989; Josiam et al., 2005).

Sullivan and Heitmeyer (2008) suggested that involvement in shopping for

apparel was a strong indicator of future purchasing decisions. Despite whether a

consumer’s involvement level is high or low, his or her fashion choices can be

influenced by this concept (Belleau, Summers, Xu, & Pinel, 2007). For example, low-

involvement customers might be more likely to be focused on price and convenience

while high-involvement consumers might tend to focus on quality and service (Tigert,

King, & Ring 1980). Those who are extremely involved in fashion can be very important

to retailers as they continuously feed their interest by shopping using various channels

(internet, brick-and-mortar, catalog). This in turn supports the retail industry’s profit.

Fairhurst et al. (1989) conducted a study to measure involvement in women’s

apparel among two groups: customers of women’s apparel specialty stores and

undergraduates in home economics courses. Findings indicated that involvement does

vary across groups, as the students were found to be more involved than the specialty

store customers with women’s apparel.

Summers et al. (1992) studied the relationship between the perceptions of

23

women shopping for apparel and fashion and the types of stores patronized

Demographics such as ethnicity, age marital status, and income were examined to

identify its influence on shopping for apparel and fashion. Shopping involvement was a

factor used to investigate the perceptions of fashion and of shopping for clothing. A

positive and strong relationship was found for respondents who patronized stores that

had clothing only and for those who shopped for themselves. A positive relationship was

found between the amount of time spent shopping and involvement, regardless of

whether the women were shopping for themselves or their families.

Demographics and ethnicity were found to be related to shopping involvement as

the study indicated that other ethnicities were more involved than Caucasian

Americans. Age was found to have an inverse relationship with involvement as younger

respondents were more involved than older participants in the study. Employment

status was also found to be significantly related to shopping involvement. Unemployed

women were more involved than housewives and retired women yet employed women

were also found to be more involved in shopping for apparel than retired women. No

relationship was found between shopping involvement and education, marital status, or

income.

Gravely (1999) studied the differences in the business-suit buying behavior

between African American males and Caucasian American males who were university

faculty, staff, and administrators. Also examined in this study were consumer attributes

such as apparel involvement, self-esteem, reference group, social class, and media

usage. Within this study it was hypothesized that apparel involvement would be

significantly related to the business-suit buying process for the different racial groups.

24

This hypothesis was supported in that apparel involvement and race were found to have

a significant relationship, and that African American males were found to be more

involved with apparel then Caucasian American males, even though the study utilized a

small sample size.

McKinney et al. (2004) examined several social factors (reference groups, social

participation, fashion involvement, clothing benefits sought, and social environment) and

their influence on buying behavior in regard to clothing among African American college

students. A significant relationship was found between fashion involvement, the amount

of time spent shopping, and the frequency of shopping trips when prices were between

$50 and $150 and above $150. In regard to clothing purchases between $50 and $150,

highly involved African Americans were found to make clothing purchases at the

beginning of a season and to impulse buy. Purchases for more than $150 were made

by highly involved students who bought clothing at the beginning of a season and were

prone to impulse buy. African Americans who were categorized in the study as low

involvement were more likely to purchase clothing on clearance and less likely to

purchase at full price.

Overall, McKinney et al.’s (2004) suggested that students with high involvement

made higher full-priced purchases instead of clearance. McKinney et al. noted that

earlier studies regarding the relationship between fashion involvement and African

Americans were mostly focusing on older consumers instead of those that were of

college age. Also, a large number of the previous studies that examined fashion

involvement included a sample of that were primarily Caucasian American, middle

class, and female. Therefore these results cannot be generalized to a sample of male

25

and female African American college students. It was suggested by McKinney et al. that

fashion involvement be a variable used to compare African Americans and other

ethnicities to provide a better understanding of the market segments within the

population of college students.

Belleau et al. (2007) examined the interest in fashion items made from emu

leather among Generation Y consumers. The researchers selected this demographic for

this study because consumers within this segment have previously found to have high

fashion involvement levels and to seek new products and follow trends. Fashion

involvement and other factors that influence this consumer group’s clothing purchases

were also investigated. The sample was found to have a slight level of fashion

involvement and none could be considered highly involved. According to the

researchers, these results could be caused by the fact that the fashion product (emu

leather) measured for involvement in the study was new to the market at the time of

study. Because the product was new to the market, the respondents could have been

unable to identify with the product. However, t-test analysis findings indicated that there

was a relationship between levels of fashion involvement among respondents who

planned to purchase the fashion items tested in the study and those who did not.

Respondents who were more involved with fashion had positive purchase intent for the

product.

Shopping Enjoyment

Shopping enjoyment was defined as the pleasure of a shopping experience for

its own sake, separate from any product selection/purchase consequence that might

result (Hirschman & Holbrook, 1982; Monsuwe, Dellaert, & Ruyter, 2004; Song, Fiore, &

26

Park, 2007). In addition, shopping enjoyment can also be described as the extent to

which an experience is enjoyed by the consumer or the degree to which enjoyment is

expressed (Marmorstein, Grewal, & Fisher 1992).

Shim and Bickle (1994) studied the psychographics, shopping orientations, and

demographics within the female market. With a large sample of 1,000 females, those

who enjoyed shopping for clothing comprised of half of the sample. Shopping enjoyment

in this study was found to be significantly related to the idea that clothing contributed to

the identification of their roles and positions. Within the sample those who had the

highest level of shopping enjoyment were also found to be more independent and

innovative. In regard to demographics, those who were younger, either married or

single, and completed at least some college coursework were found to have the highest

level of shopping enjoyment. There were no significant findings as the sample in this

study population was 93% Caucasian American.

Cox, Cox, and Anderson (2005) examined the shopping enjoyment of retail store

shoppers among females, of which the majority was Caucasian American. The

researchers developed shopping enjoyment clusters and found that participants who

were categorized as shopping enthusiasts had the highest level of shopping enjoyment

and consisted of a small segment of the entire sample. Shopping enthusiasts were

found by the researchers to have a lower income, be either married or single and either

have adult children or none at all.

Moore and Carpenter (2008) studied four different generations and their

perceptions of marketing strategies related to price, quality, and shopping enjoyment.

Generations that reflected the U.S.market included the Silent Generation, Baby

27

Boomers, 13th Generation, and Generation Y. Ethnic groups within the sample included

Caucasian Americans and African Americans. Through factor analysis one dimension

was developed to measure shopping enjoyment. Significant differences were found

when comparing the differences between shopping enjoyment and the generations. The

average factor score for Generation Y was higher than entire sample mean score.

It is hypothesized that consumers’ ethnicity is connected to the leisure activities

in which they participate because ethnicity adds to the imaginal tendencies and sensory

arousal-seeking that shape consumer behavior (Ethnicity as a Guide, 1982). Fisher

(1996) referenced a study by Yankelovich Partners that indicated major differences in

shopping enjoyment between African Americans and Caucasian Americans.

Yankelovich Partners found that among survey results of 1,000 African Americans, 6

out of 10 African Americans said it was fun and exciting to shop for clothes. However,

these results were smaller for the 4,000 Caucasian Americans, who were surveyed,

with only 35% agreeing that shopping was fun. These results indicated an increase from

a previous study conducted in 1992.

Shopping enjoyment was another psychological factor measured by Dixon

(2007), who examined its ability to predict the level of dress and appearance among

African American college students. Of the sample participants, almost half agreed that

they shopped because buying things made them happy, more than half agreed that

shopping was fun, and 28.9% received a real high from shopping. Additional questions

were asked regarding shopping enjoyment. Findings indicated that more than half the

sample really enjoyed gathering information before making a purchase, and enjoyed

visiting stores before making a purchase.

28

Fashion Consciousness

Fashion consciousness can be described as being both motivated and highly

capable of shopping for one’s own clothing. Fashion conscious consumers are

concerned with what they wear. People who are more fashion conscious are more

knowledgeable about stores, able to assess merchandise value, understand what is in

fashion and what is appropriate to wear, and understand which styles look better on

them (Tatzel, 1982).

Tatzel (1982) reviewed and combined a collection of studies that discussed the

differences in consumer behavior toward clothing and created a description of the

fashion conscious consumer. Based on the review of literature regarding the fashion

conscious consumer, Tatzel’s findings indicated that shopping behaviors could be

categorized based on the skill and motivation levels, personality, lifestyle, and attitude

toward shopping among consumers. Leadership traits could be shown in these

shoppers as they valued appearance, authority, and status. It was also found by Tatzel

that the more fashion conscious person was competitive, self-assertive, adventurous,

self-confident, and attention-seeking. The study also suggested that retailers targeted

this customer with advertisements focusing on expanding one’s ego, using fashion to

make appearances at social occasions, and the importance of changing styles.

Morgan (2005) studied the effect of preferred music genre on materialism and

fashion consciousness of youths between the ages of 15 and 24. In regard to ethnicity

this study found a possible difference between African Americans and Caucasian

Americans and their level of fashion consciousness, in that more than half of the sample

that selected hip-hop as their favored genre of music was African American; a small

29

portion of the Caucasian Americans in the sample preferred hip-hop. The findings also

indicated that those who listened to hip-hop and rhythm and blues (R&B) or urban

music were the most fashion conscious, and those who listened to rock music were the

least. Based on this study’s findings it could be suggested that fashion consciousness

could be higher within African American populations when compared with Caucasian

American populations.

A study conducted by Bakewell and Mitchell (2003) investigated the fashion

decision-making process of Generation Y females in the United Kingdom. Sample

respondents consisted of undergraduate students. The sample was clustered into

groups to categorize their decision making process. The cluster that was considered to

be the most fashion and style conscious were comprised of a small number of the

sample participants referred to as trend-setting loyals. This cluster was also found to

visit the same stores and purchase the same brands. Recreational discount seekers

formed a cluster found to be fashion and novelty conscious and concerned more with

the overall price and value of a fashion item.

Bakewell, Mitchell, and Rothwell (2006) investigated fashion consciousness

among Generation Y males in the United Kingdom. The sample comprised 346 males

between the ages of 18 and 25, with the majority of the sample being Caucasian; other

ethnicities were not identified in the sample results. Survey items that received of the

highest scores for the sample were those that were related to cognitive and affective

subject matter. However, the researchers noted that the findings indicating that the

sample that was fashion conscious could not automatically be converted into showing

how the participants practiced different fashion behaviors. For example the statement

30

“I’m very alert to changes in men’s fashion trends” had a mean score that was more

positive, while the statements “I am usually the first to buy the latest styles” and “Other

people ask me what is fashionable/trendy” had low mean scores.

Findings from this study indicated that while Generation Y males were fashion

conscious, they were not as eager to accept new styles. This suggests that that fashion

consciousness might vary in its relationship to fashion leadership. The researchers

conducted factor analysis on the 33 scale items and found 2 factors that indicated the

relationship to fashion. These two factors included having a positive or a negative view

toward fashion. They also asserted that these two views were related to the actions of

the fashion conscious and non-fashion conscious male consumer. A person who was

fashion conscious also had the ability to recognize the ideas behind men’s fashions,

was conscious of his wardrobe, cared about selecting and wearing clothing, realized

that fashion communicates to others, and had a high interest in fashion literature. Those

who were not fashion conscious do not shop frequently for clothing, believed that one

needs to be rich to be fashionable, did not talk about fashion with other men, had a

limited amount of clothing, and were very careful to adopt new fashions. Bakewell,

Mitchell, and Rothwell (2006) suggested that despite this study’s findings, more

research needs to be conducted in regard to Generation Y and fashion consciousness,

particularly concerning the possibility that male opinions about fashion might vary by

race.

General Leadership

Personality traits can be described as characteristics that account for differences

between individuals and that are predictive of their behavior (Howard & Sheth, 1969).

31

Self-confidence is a personality trait that provides an understanding of a person’s

relation to self (Dixon, 2007). Stajkovic and Luthans (1998) found that self-confidence

has a key role in leadership. Self-confidence can be defined as the capability to

successfully accomplish something; it is based on perception, is task specific, and can

be changed or developed by actual experience (Hollenbeck & Hall, 2004). Even when

someone has not experienced the task that he or she is currently facing, he or she can

assess the capabilities gained previously that might be transferrable to a new task.

Previous research has studied personality traits and their influence on consumer

behavior with conflicting results. Sparks and Tucker (1971) found that specific

personality traits cannot explain the use of particular products. Alpert (1972)

investigated the relationship between personality traits and product attributes. Findings

from this study indicated that personality profiles served as better indicators of

consumer behavior than individual personality traits. On the other hand, Wells and

Tigert’s (1971) review of literature explained how using activities, interests, and

opinions, also referred to as “psychographics,” assisted in describing potential target

markets and current consumers of products.

Wells and Tigert (1971) also explained that not only are demographic and

geographic criteria a base for segmentation, but psychological, social, and attitudinal

measurements should also be used. Examples of the use of psychographic data can

help to understand the differences between generations, genders, leaders, and

followers in product usage. It is important for consumers to be segmented into groups

because a product can be used for different roles or purposes. Within the study it was

also indicated that personality traits are closely related to the behavior under

32

investigation.

Behling (1992) identified six psychographic variables related to fashion

leadership: gregariousness, socially active, self-absorption, conformity,

competitiveness, and venturesome. Innovativeness and interest in fashion were also

found to be related to fashion leadership. Fashion innovators, which could be combined

with the fashion leadership category, were also found to have a significant relationship

with the psychographic variable of self-confidence.

Self-confidence has also been found to influence differentiation in product

preference among consumers (Belleau et al., 2007). The ability to understand a

consumer’s relation to self gives retailers the capacity to create target markets (Evans,

1989). It provides a comprehensible picture of how to adapt marketing strategies toward

the personality trait of self-confidence or lack thereof (Percy, Ketchum, MacLeod, &

Grove, 1976).

Research has suggested that a relationship exists between self-confidence and

the consumer category of fashion clothing. Paek (1986) examined garment fashions

and their effect on the perception of personality traits. In this study participants

evaluated four garment styles (conservative, daring, dressy, and casual). Perceptions of

to personality traits were then given regarding the garment styles. The personality traits

consisted of 11 intellectual traits, 6 social attributes, and 1 physical attribute. Self-

confidence was one of the 11 intellectual traits used in this study. The sample was

composed of female college students. Self-confidence, persistence, individualism, and

being popular were significantly correlated with daring garment styles. Results indicated

that participants who were highly interested in clothing viewed individuals with a daring

33

clothing style to be self-confident.

Casill and Drake (1987) studied choices for social and employment apparel of

females and the relationship to the consumer’s lifestyle. It was found that dressing in

appropriate clothing was related to high self-confidence for both social and work wear.

The apparel attributes found through this study to be important to consumer self-

confidence were good fit, suitability for occasion, and high quality of clothing. Self-

confident consumers were found to place a high value on education, not be price

conscious, and favor clothing that potentially enhanced their physical attractiveness.

Self-confidence was examined in addition to fashion leaders’ and followers’

shopping orientations and attitudes toward exotic leather apparel products (Belleau et

al., 2001). The Sproles model of fashion adoption (Sproles, 1979) was used, which

included self-confidence being used to measure the awareness and interest toward a

new product. One of the hypotheses included in this study theorized that there would be

no differences in fashion leaders’ and fashion followers’ levels of self-confidence. This

hypothesis was not supported as the results indicated that fashion leaders were more

self-confident and fashion followers were less self-confident. According to the

researchers, self-confidence impacted consumers during the awareness and interest

stage of the Sproles (1979) model. It was also suggested by the researchers that

because these were two of the top three stages, a higher level of self-confidence guided

an individual to a positive purchasing decision. Belleau et al. (2001) also examined self-

confidence and the interest in fashion items made from emu leather among a sample of

predominately Caucasian American Generation Y consumers; overall the sample

participants had high levels of self-confidence.

34

Self-confidence and its ability to predict the level of dress and appearance

among African American college students was another psychological factor measured

by Dixon (2007). The majority of students in this sample had above average scores of

self-confidence. Nearly half of the sample agreed that they had more self-confidence

than did other participants, and almost half believed that they were capable of swaying

others to do something by talking to them. More than half the sample believed they

were more independent than others, believed they had a lot of personal ability, and

preferred to be considered leaders. The majority of the sample disagreed with the

statement indicating that they had never been outstanding at anything.

Shopping Behavior

Shopping behavior can give explanations as to where, why, when, and how

consumers shop for clothing (Lamb, 1993). Greater details regarding shopping behavior

for clothing could include the identification of the motivation, the amount spent on

clothing, and comfort levels when shopping for clothing. Shopping behavior can be split

into the time and frequency with which one shops for clothing (McKinney et al., 2004).

The research comparing African Americans and Caucasian Americans suggests

that there can be behavioral differences between these two ethnicities. Alexis (1962)

covered previous studies of the expenditures of African Americans and Caucasian

Americans in the categories of food, housing, clothing, recreation and leisure, home

furnishings and equipment, medical care, auto transportation, and non-auto

transportation. Findings indicated that African Americans spent more than Caucasian

Americans on clothing and that African Americans were not as price sensitive as

Caucasian Americans.

35

Sexton (1972) surveyed research regarding the income levels of African

Americans and Caucasian Americans and motivation behind three segments of buying

behavior. The income levels were categorized as low and high, and the three behaviors

included store shopping behavior, product behavior, and buying behavior toward

brands. Clothing was a product category that was examined by Sexton. Of the studies

Sexton reviewed, African Americans were found to spend more than Caucasian

Americans, regardless of income levels, for clothing and other products such as

cosmetics and toiletries, liquor, and tobacco. Sexton, suggested that the motivation

behind this behavior was possibly due to the desire of African Americans to present

themselves visually as part of mainstream America.

Fontes and Fan (2006) used budget allocation to measure the differences of

among ethnic groups in purchasing status-conveying goods. The differences were

identified among the annual household budget allocations for apparel, housing, and

home furnishings among Caucasian Americans, Asian Americans, Hispanics, and

African Americans. Findings from this study indicated that African Americans and

Hispanics budgeted more money for clothing than Caucasian Americans and Asian

Americans. African Americans had the highest actual percentage value of budget for

apparel among all of the ethnic groups examined. The average annual budget

difference for apparel was $283 for Hispanic households and $291 for African American

households when compared to Caucasian American households. This is consistent with

Dardis, Derrick, and Lehfeld (1981) who found that African Americans spent more on

clothing than Caucasian Americans.

Collectively college students are a strong market segment as full-time students

36

represented more than $237 billion in spending power in 2008, which was a 19.7%

increase compared to 2007 (Frank, 2008). According to Fairhurst et al. (1989), college

students spent major portions of their discretionary income on clothing. This created a

wide array of opportunities for various industries (Hayhoe, Leach, Turner, Bruin, &

Lawrence, 2000). Hayhoe et al. noted that several researchers have found that the item

purchased most by college students is clothing.

Dixon (2007) studied the social and psychological factors on the dress and

appearance of African American college students, which provided demographic data of

purchasing behavior of the sample. Of the 280 sample participants, 51% indicated they

spent less than $100 on clothing, 26.1% spent $101.00 to $200.00, and 14.3% spent

$201.00 to $300.00. Thirty-eight percent of the sample shopped for clothing at least

once a month, 23.2% of the sample indicated they shopped once every two weeks,

22.9% shopped for special occasions only, 10% shopped once a week, and 5.7%

shopped more than once a week. The study also found that referents such as family

members and friends were not heavy influencing factors in clothing purchasing

decisions, which could suggest that students are comfortable in making purchasing

decisions on their own.

Kang and Johnson (2009) examined post-purchase behavior among

undergraduate students to identify motivation for returns. The majority of the sample

was females between the ages of 18 to 27. The average amount spent monthly on

clothing within this sample was $136.00. Over half of the sample shopped for apparel

once a month or every two weeks, while only 5.4% shopped more than once a week

(the remaining amount of the sample’s frequency of shopping trips were not given).

37

Study results indicated that fashion leaders were not frequent returners. However, there

was a significant correlation between buying on impulse and returns (the ethnicity of the

sample was not given in the demographics of this research).

Kinley (in press) studied the shopping behaviors among women in relation to

their fit preferences and the clothing benefits sought for the clothing item, pants. The

majority of the sample was Caucasian American and almost half were between ages

18-22, the conventional age of college students. The researchers measured the clothing

benefits sought among four factors (fashion forward, sexy, reputation, and individualist).

Findings indicated that women who shopped for clothing twice a month or more enjoyed

receiving benefits from clothing such as being perceived as fashion forward, sexy, and

reputation. Women in this study who enjoyed benefits such as fashion forward, sexy,

and reputation were also found to be more willing to spend more money on pants for

themselves.

Summary

Understanding the differences between ethnic groups and their attitudes and

behaviors toward clothing will allow the retail industry to better serve them. This chapter

discussed previous research to build a foundation to show that there are differences in

ethnic groups and their fashion personality characteristics (fashion leadership, fashion

involvement, shopping enjoyment, and fashion consciousness). Differences in ethnic

groups were discussed regarding shopping behaviors which included, motivation for

shopping, comfort levels of purchasing clothing for one’s self, frequency of shopping for

clothing in general, frequency of shopping for one’s self specifically, frequency of

returned clothing purchases, money spent on clothing for one’s self, and time spent on

38

shopping trips. The review also discussed previous research conducted regarding

general leadership and its relationship to fashion personality characteristics. The

present study attempts to provide a better understanding of African American and

Caucasian American college students in regard to fashion personality characteristics,

general leadership, and shopping behaviors.

39

CHAPTER III

METHODOLOGY

Using the survey research method, data were collected and analyzed. The

survey used in this study was developed to identify the similarities and differences

between African Americans’ and Caucasian Americans’ levels of general leadership and

fashion personality characteristics such as fashion involvement, fashion consciousness,

and shopping enjoyment. Shopping behavior and demographic information were

collected to compare and contrast ethnic group differences. In addition, data regarding

general leadership and fashion leadership were used to examine any relationships

between the two groups and their fashion personality characteristics.

Sample

Participants for this study were obtained from Texas Southern University (TSU),

a historically black university (HBU), and the University of North Texas (UNT), a state

university in the southwestern region of the United States. The sample was a

nonrandom convenience sample of African American and Caucasian American

students. I targeted instructors of business classes because these classes were related

to the research. Participants of other ethnicities were removed from the data sample. In

addition, because this study focused on Generation Y consumers, students older than

30 years of age were removed from the data sample.

Research Instrument

The questionnaire from a previous study conducted in a research methods

course at the University of North Texas was used in this research and additional

questions were developed based on the review of literature and recommendations given

40

by the thesis committee. I conducted a pilot study of the questionnaire with a

combination of 7 graduate and undergraduate students at the University of North Texas.

Revisions were made to the questionnaire in order to clarify the meaning of one

question. Some of the students in the pilot study misunderstood the question regarding

rationale for clothing purchase returns. The total time for completing the questionnaire

was 7 minutes.

Modifications for Final Instrument

After I presented the thesis proposal to the thesis committee the following

changes were implemented:

(a) The answer choices regarding the question for expenditure amount on

clothing were changed from asking participants to how much was spent every 3

months to every month.

(b) An open-ended question was added to the survey to identify which celebrities,

television programs and magazines were used by the respondents to obtain

ideas for fashion.

(c) An open-ended question was added at the end of the survey to allow

questionnaire respondents to express their personal opinions about fashion.

Final Instrument

The final instrument was submitted to the University of North Texas Institutional

Review Board (IRB) for approval. Approval of the study was obtained; however, this

was contingent on the research receiving approval of the study from Texas Southern

University. The final instrument was sent to the Committee for Protection of Human

Subjects at Texas Southern University and approved. The first portion of the survey

41

contained a letter to the participants that gave them information about the background

of the study and the requirements to participate. The letter first informed students of the

purpose of the study and that all responses would remain anonymous. Next, the

students were informed that the age requirement for completing the survey was a

minimum of 18 years and that answering the questions served as their consent to

participate in the study. Contact information for me and my research advisor were given

for any questions or concerns regarding the instrument. Finally, the letter informed

participants that the survey was approved by the Institutional Review Board at the

University of North Texas and the participants were thanked for their assistance in the

study.

Instrument Variables

Fashion Leadership

Goldsmith, Frieden, and Kilsheimer's (1993) Fashion Leadership Scale was

employed to measure the participants’ levels of fashion leadership. The scale originated

from a Gutman and Mills (1982) study that developed two different scales to compare

levels of fashion leadership between participants from the United States and the United

Kingdom. Both countries' scales included 17 items that were factor analyzed, and five

items were kept for each sample. For this study, the scale used the remaining five items

which were scored on a 5-point Likert scale ranging from 1 = strongly disagree to 5 =

strongly agree. The scale's reported reliability alpha was 0.85.

General Perception of Leadership

The study employed the self-confidence scale created by Wells and Tigert (1971)

to measure the respondent’s leadership. This study used a modified 6-item index that

42

was used in Dixon’s 2007 study. This scale is used as a general scale to identify self-

confidence and self-perception of leadership with scale items including “I think I have a

lot of personal ability,” “I like to be considered a leader,” and “I often can talk others into

doing something.” The six items on the scale were measured using a 5-point scale

ranging from 1= strongly disagree to 5 = strongly agree. All six items were summed to

obtain the respondent confidence score. A high score indicates that the person

perceives himself or herself as a leader. Dixon (2007) computed a Cronbach’s alpha of

0.70.

Shopping Enjoyment

O'Guinn and Faber's (1989) Shopping Enjoyment Scale, which measures the

enjoyment received from a consumer’s shopping experience, was also used. The scale

had a computed alpha of 0.89. It was composed of three items measured on a Likert

scale where 1 = strongly disagree and to 5 = strongly agree. Scores that are higher on

the scale indicate that the participant perceives shopping to be a fun activity and scores

that are lower signify that shopping is not an enjoyed experience.

Fashion Consciousness

Lumpkin and Darden's (1982) Fashion Consciousness Scale was utilized to

measure the significance of being in fashion, mainly in regard to clothing. Lumpkin and

Darden combined their two-item version with the original scale created by Wells and

Tigert (1971), which consisted of four items, for a total of six items. The scale items

range from 1 = never to 6 = always. Reliability of the scale was obtained with an alpha

of 0.74 (Manrai, Lascu, Manrai & Babb, 2001).

43

Personal Involvement Inventory

The Personal Involvement Inventory was developed by Zaichowsky (1985). This

scale is applicable to advertisements, brands, product categories and purchasing

choices. This study employed the scale to measure involvement with being fashionable.

The original scale consisted of 20 semantic differential items, which were each scored

by a 7-point, bipolar scale. For this study, the adapted 10-item scale used by Josiam,

Kinley, Kim (2005) was used. Items were summed to provide a measurement of

involvement. The sum was then averaged, the involvement score ranged from 1 = low

involvement to 7 = high involvement. Josiam et al. (2005) computed a Cronbach’s alpha

for reliability of the scale of 0.96.

Shopping Behaviors

Questions regarding purchasing behaviors were asked to identify (1) comfort

level with purchasing clothing for themselves (1 = extremely uncomfortable, 5 =

extremely comfortable), (2) the reason and frequency for returning clothing, (3) the

frequency of shopping trips, (4) the frequency personal clothing purchases both in the

stores and online, (5) the motivation for purchasing and (6) time and expenditure

amounts spent when shopping for clothing. In addition, respondents were asked open-

ended questions regarding the average amount of money they spend on clothing per

month and average amount of time do they spend on a shopping trip.

Demographics

Demographic information was collected to identify each respondent’s ethnicity,

age, major, gender, classification level in college and employment status. Nesbit and

Weinstein, (1986) explained the importance of the use of demographics to identify

44

market segments and gave four reasons for collecting demographical information. The

first reason is the demographic information is easiest way to obtain way to identify a

target market. Secondly, demographics are a strong indicator of shopping behavior.

Thirdly, demographic variables can be used to identify continuing trends. Lastly,

demographics can be used to assess the effectiveness of marketing efforts.

Additional data were collected regarding involvement with clothing, celebrities

from which ideas for fashion were received, television programs watched for ideas for

fashion and magazines read for ideas for fashion. An open-ended question was also

used to allow participants to describe the role of fashion plays in their lives. These

variables were not incorporated into this study.

Procedure for Collecting Data

A paper survey consisting of 68 questions was administered to students at the

historically black university during nine class meetings. The participants at the state

university also answered written surveys during six class meetings. All of the surveys

were administered to the students at the beginning of the class meetings by the

researcher.

Data Analysis

Questionnaires were completed and coded with the results entered into an IBM®

SPSS® Statistics statistical and data management package (SPSS Inc., an IBM

Company, Chicago, www.spss.com). Problems or missing responses within the data set

were identified by using descriptive statistics to create frequencies. The specific tests

computed are presented in Table 1.

45

Table 1

Hypotheses and Tests

Hypothesis Test

Hypothesis 1: Ethnicity will influence the following fashion personality characteristics: a: level of fashion leadership b: level of fashion involvement c: amount of shopping enjoyment d: fashion consciousness

t-test for independent means

Hypothesis 2: Ethnicity will influence the following shopping behaviors: a: comfort with purchasing clothing for self b: frequency of shopping for clothing c: frequency of purchasing clothing for self d: money spent monthly on clothing for self e: time spent on a shopping trip; and f: frequency of returned clothing purchases

t-test

χ-square

χ-square

t-test

t-test

χ-square

Hypothesis 3: Fashion leadership will be positively correlated with: a: level of general leadership b: level of fashion involvement c: amount of shopping enjoyment d: fashion consciousness e: age f: classification level in college

Correlation

Hypothesis 4: General leadership will be positively correlated with: a: level of fashion involvement b: amount of shopping enjoyment c: amount of fashion consciousness d: age e: classification level in college

Correlation

46

CHAPTER IV

RESULTS

This study’s aim was to determine whether or not ethnicity was an influence on

fashion personality characteristics (fashion leadership, fashion involvement, fashion

consciousness, and shopping enjoyment), as well as similarities and differences in

shopping behaviors between African American and Caucasian American Generation Y

consumers. This study also attempted to identify the influence of general leadership

characteristics on fashion personality characteristics, fashion leadership, fashion

involvement, fashion consciousness, and shopping enjoyment. Data were collected

through paper surveys at two universities, the University of North Texas and Texas

Southern University, over a three-month period from July to September 2009.

Professors were asked to allow the researcher to distribute the questionnaires

during scheduled class times. The sample population was comprised of African

Americans and Caucasian Americans, males and females older than the age of 18. A

total of 642 surveys were collected. Surveys with missing values, participants who

indicated an ethnic background other than African American or Caucasian American,

and participants who were older than the age of 30 were eliminated from the analysis.

For these reasons, 135 surveys were eliminated, reducing the sample size to 507.

Description of Sample

The sample was evenly split between the relevant variables. The participants

consisted of 268 African Americans (52.9%) and 239 Caucasian Americans (47.1%).

Two hundred forty (47.3%) were male and 267 (52.7%) were female; 236 (46.5%)

attended Texas Southern University and 271 (53.5%) attended the University of North

47

Texas. The mean age of the sample was 21.78. Table 2 summarizes the demographics

of the sample.

Table 2

Sample Demographics

Demographics f %

Ethnicity

African American 268 52.9

Caucasian American 239 47.1

University attended

Texas Southern University 236 46.5

University of North Texas 271 53.5

Gender

Male 240 47.3

Female 267 52.7

Classification

Freshman 59 11.6

Sophomore 49 9.7

Junior 174 34.3

Senior 225 44.4

Note: n = 507

48

Instrument Scales

Fashion and General Leadership Personality Characteristics

Table 3 provides an overview of the sample in terms of the scales used to

measure fashion personality characteristics, which included the scale for fashion

leadership, fashion involvement, fashion consciousness, and shopping enjoyment.

Items that comprised the scale for general leadership are also included in Table 3. The

mean score for each scale item was computed for both African American and

Caucasian American participants, and for the total sample. African Americans had

higher mean scores than Caucasian Americans for all of the individual scale items.

Table 3

Statistics for Fashion Personality Characteristics and General Leadership

African American

Caucasian American

Total

M SD M SD M SD

Scale: Fashion leadership a

I am aware of fashion trends and want to be one of the first to try them.

3.06 1.13 2.67 1.04 2.87 1.10

I am the first to try new fashion; therefore, many people regard me as being a fashion leader.

2.75 1.20 2.08 1.00 2.43 1.58

It is important for me to be a fashion leader.

2.45 1.32 1.97 1.08 2.22 1.23

I am confident in my ability to recognize fashion trends.

3.71 1.15 3.13 1.15 3.43 1.18

Clothes are one of the most important ways I have of expressing my individuality.

3.27 1.25 2.78 1.17 3.03 1.24

I don’t spend a lot of time on fashion-related activities.*

3.24 1.18 3.19 1.25 3.21 1.22

(table continues)

49

Table 3 (continued.)

African American

Caucasian American

Total

M SD M SD M SD

Scale: General leadership b

I think I have more self-confidence than most people.

4.12 .83 3.60 .82 3.87 .87

I am more independent than most people.

4.18 .84 3.95 .86 4.07 .86

I think I have a lot of personal ability.

4.42 .66 4.23 .63 4.32 .65

I like to be considered a leader. 4.24 .85 3.87 .88 4.06 .88

I often can talk others into doing something.

3.97 .87 3.65 .85 3.81 .87

I have never been really outstanding at anything.*

4.33 .98 4.00 .95 4.18 .98

Scale: Fashion involvement c

Unimportant/important 4.64 1.67 4.11 1.65 4.39 1.68

Boring/interesting 4.91 1.80 4.32 1.62 4.63 1.74

Means nothing/means a lot 4.37 1.77 3.98 1.46 4.19 1.64 Worthless/valuable 4.58 1.68 4.20 1.44 4.40 1.58 Not beneficial/beneficial 4.76 1.75 4.49 1.44 4.63 1.61 Irrelevant/relevant 4.60 1.72 4.27 1.56 4.45 1.65 Unexciting/exciting 4.93 1.77 4.30 1.70 4.63 1.77 Unappealing/appealing 5.24 1.74 4.62 1.69 4.94 1.75

Nonessential/essential 4.57 1.76 4.03 1.46 4.32 1.64

Unwanted/wanted 4.88 1.78 4.55 1.55 4.73 1.68

Scale: Fashion consciousness a I usually have one or more outfits of the latest style.

3.78 1.06 3.08 1.20 3.45 1.19

I usually dress for fashion, not comfort.

2.97 1.17 2.59 1.13 2.79 1.16

An important part of my life and activities is dressing stylishly.

3.13 1.15 2.71 1.01 2.93 1.10

I often try the latest hair styles when they change.

2.35 1.29 2.10 1.10 2.24 1.21

It is important to me that my clothes be of the latest style.

2.97 1.15 2.50 1.06 2.75 1.13

A person should try to dress in fashion.

3.13 1.04 2.78 .90 2.97 .99

(table continues)

50

Table 3 (continued.)

African American

Caucasian American

Total

M SD M SD M SD

Scale: Shopping enjoyment a

I shop because buying things makes me happy.

3.29 1.41 3.10 1.35 3.20 1.38

Shopping is fun. 3.72 1.30 3.35 1.36 3.55 1.34

I get a real “high” from shopping. 3.00 1.88 2.74 1.38 2.88 1.67 Note:

a Likert-type scale was used with 5 = always and 1 = never.

b Likert-type scale was used with 5 = strongly agree, 4 = agree, 3 = neutral, 2 = disagree, and 1 = strongly

disagree. c The 10 semantic items were each scored on a 7-point, bipolar scale where the 1st term = 1 and the 2nd

term = 7. *These statements were reversed scored.

Shopping Behavior

Respondents were asked to identify their shopping behaviors regarding (1)

comfort level with purchasing clothing for themselves, (2) the reason and frequency for

returning clothing, (3) the frequency of shopping trips, (4) the frequency personal

clothing purchases (5) the motivation for purchasing, and (6) time and expenditure

amounts spent when shopping for clothing. Respondents were also asked about their

motivation to shop for clothing. The highest number of subjects indicated that they were

motivated by the opportunity to take advantage of sales (20.6%) and 47.4% indicated

their motivation was due to wanting something new. Frequencies and the mean scores

were calculated for the shopping behavior questions for both ethnic backgrounds and

the total sample (Table 4). The missing responses for various categories within the

shopping behavior questions are due to the respondent’s ability to select “not applicable

(n/a)” or non-response.

51

Table 4

Frequencies of Shopping Behaviors

African American (n = 268)

Caucasian American (n = 239)

Total (N = 507)

n % n % n %

Items purchased and returned (in the last 3 months) None 139 51.9% 127 53.1% 266 52.5% 1-5 110 41.0% 94 39.3% 204 40.2% 6-10 9 3.4% 13 5.4% 22 4.3% 11-15 8 3.0% 5 2.1% 13 2.6% 16 or more 2 0.7% 0 0.0% 2 0.4%

Reason for clothing purchase returns

Poor fit 47 17.7% 54 22.8% 101 20.1% Did not go with present wardrobe 10 3.8% 12 5.1% 22 4.4% Wrong style for body type 22 8.3% 25 10.5% 47 9.4% Did not try on first 81 30.6% 60 25.3% 141 28.1% Negative reaction from others. 0 0.0% 2 0.8% 2 0.4% Other 9 3.4% 16 6.8% 25 5.0%

Frequency of shopping trips

Twice a month 22 8.2% 40 16.7% 62 12.2% About once a month. 25 9.3% 46 19.2% 71 14.0% About once every two months. 53 19.8% 52 21.8% 105 20.7% Once a season (4 times a year). 80 29.9% 58 24.3% 138 27.2% Less than 4 times a year. 88 32.8% 43 18.0% 131 25.8%

Frequency of personal purchases

Rarely/almost never 9 3.4% 22 9.2% 31 6.1% Sometimes 41 15.3% 76 31.8% 117 23.1% Most of the time 129 48.1% 104 43.5% 233 46.0% Every time 89 33.2% 37 15.5% 126 24.9%

Motivation to shop

Social occasion 34 12.7% 29 12.2% 63 12.5% Change of season 24 9.0% 20 8.4% 44 8.7% Take advantage of sales 59 22.0% 45 18.9% 104 20.6% Size has changed 20 7.5% 17 7.1% 37 7.3% Want something new 118 44.0% 122 51.3% 240 47.4% Keep up with new styles 13 4.9% 5 2.1% 18 3.6%

52

Table 5 Mean Scores for Comfort Level of Purchases, Expenditure and Time Spent Shopping

African American

(n = 268)

Caucasian American (n = 239)

Total

(N = 507)

M SD M SD M SD

Shopping behaviors

Comfort level of purchasing clothing for selfa

4.42 0.86 4.19 0.89 4.31 0.88

Time spent shopping (in minutes)

165.00 99.00 132.00 70.00 149.00 88.00

Monthly clothing expenditure

$203.00 $188.00 $121.29 $115.64 $164.34 $162.34

Note: a

Likert-type scale was used with 5 = extremely comfortable and 1 = extremely uncomfortable.

When questioned about the comfort level of making their own clothing purchase

decisions for themselves, the entire sample was close to “extremely comfortable” (M =

4.31). However, African Americans were more comfortable with making their own

clothing purchase decisions (M = 4.42) than Caucasian Americans (M = 4.19). The

comfort level of the sample making their own clothing purchase decisions is supported

by the responses regarding frequencies of returns. The number of items purchased and

returned in the last three months was low for the majority of the sample. Fifty-one

percent of African Americans indicated that they had not returned an item of clothing

they purchased and 41% returned between one to five items in the last three months.

Fifty-three percent of Caucasian Americans indicated that they had not returned an item

of clothing they purchased and 39.3% have returned one to five items in the last three

months.

53

Respondents also indicated reasons for returns with the majority of the sample

ranging from poor fit (20.1%) to did not try on first (28.1%), which may indicate poor fit

as well. Eighty-one African Americans indicated they returned clothing because of not

trying on clothing first, while only 60 Caucasian Americans indicated this was a reason

for returns.

Respondents were also questioned about how often they went on shopping trips,

and how often they made personal purchases. Overall, most of the respondents

(27.3%) went shopping once a season (four times a year), 25.8% went fewer than four

times a year, and 20.7% about once every two months. Responses for the frequency of

personal purchases when shopping indicated that the majority of subjects either

purchase for themselves most of the time (46.0%) or every time (24.9%). Forty-eight

percent of African Americans indicated that they purchase for themselves most of the

time or every time (33.2%), while 43.5% of Caucasian Americans indicated that they

purchase for themselves most of the time and but only 15.5% purchase every time.

Finally, respondents were asked how much time they spend on a shopping trip

and how much money they spend on clothing per month. The mean score for each

question was computed for both African Americans and Caucasian American

participants, and for the total sample. Each subject’s responses for the time spent on a

shopping trip were converted to minutes. African American respondents indicated they

spent more time on a shopping trip (M = 165 minutes) than Caucasian Americans (M =

132 minutes). Responses for the amount of money spent on clothing per month varied

from $0 to $6,000 and a scatter plot was created to remove the outliers. After removing

the outliers the amount of money spent on clothing ranged from $20 to $1,000. The

54

mean for African Americans was $203.60, which was almost double the mean for

Caucasian Americans (M = $121.34). The total sample mean was $164.34 (Table 5).

Therefore, findings from this study indicate that African Americans shop more often,

spend more time shopping, purchase more for themselves, and spend more on clothing

than Caucasian Americans.

Reliability of Instrument

To determine internal consistency for the fashion leadership, general leadership,

fashion involvement, fashion consciousness and shopping enjoyment scales,

Cronbachs’s alpha was computed. A rating of 0.70 was used as the accepted standard

for reliability (Nunnally, 1978). Alphas obtained in the study were similar to the originally

published statistics. As indicated in Table 6 the coefficients for each scale ranged from

0.72 to 0.96.

Table 6

Cronbach’s Alpha Reliability of Survey Scales

Scale Number of Items Reliability (α)

for current study Original (α)

Fashion leadership 6 0.82 0.85

General leadership 6 0.72 0.73

Fashion involvement 10 0.96 0.89

Fashion consciousness

6 0.86 0.96

Shopping enjoyment 3 0.81 0.88

55

Analysis of Hypotheses

Four hypotheses were developed for the study based on the review of literature.

The data collected from the final instrument were statistically analyzed to apply to the

designated hypotheses within the study.

H1: Ethnicity and Fashion Personality Characteristics

Hypothesis 1 stated that ethnicity will influence fashion leadership, fashion

involvement, shopping enjoyment, and fashion consciousness. To assess this

hypothesis, independent t-tests were computed with ethnicity as the dependent

variable. Differences were significant at the 0.01 level between the two ethnicities and

fashion leadership (t = 6.00; p < .001), fashion involvement (t = 3.70; p < .001),

shopping enjoyment (t = 2.41; p < .05) and fashion consciousness (t = 5.64; p < .001)

as indicated in Table 7. Analysis of the means indicated African American participants

saw themselves as stronger fashion leaders, had a higher degree of fashion

involvement, enjoyed shopping more, and were more fashion consciousness than

Caucasian Americans. Therefore Hypothesis 1 was accepted (Figure 3).

56

Fashion Leadership

Fashion Involvement

Shopping Enjoyment

Fashion Consciousness

Fashion Personality Characteristics

Ethnicity

Shopping Behaviors

Comfort in Buying Clothing for Self

Frequency of Shopping for Clothing

Frequency of Purchasing Clothing for Self

Money Spent on Clothing for Self

Time Spent on Shopping Trip

Frequency of Returned Clothing Purchases

H1a

(t =

6.00

, p<

.001

)

H1b

(t = 3

.70,

p <

.001

H1c

(t= 2.41, p

< .05)

H1d

(t = 5.64, p < .001)

H2a

(t = 2.94, p < .01)

H2d(t = 5.41, p < .001)H2e(t = 4.21, p < .001)

H2b(χ² = 28.85, p < .001)

H2c(χ² = 38.53, p < .001)

Figure 3. Ethnicity’s relationship to fashion personality characteristics and shopping behaviors.

57

Table 7

The Influence of Ethnicity on Fashion Personality Characteristics: t-test Results

African American Caucasian American

M SD M SD t p

Fashion leadership 3.08 0.83 2.64 0.83 6.00 0.0001

Fashion involvement

4.75 1.49 4.29 1.32 3.70 0.0001

Shopping enjoyment

3.33 1.27 3.07 1.23 2.41 0.0170

Fashion consciousness

3.06 0.84 2.63 0.84 5.64 0.0001

H2: Ethnicity and Shopping Behavior

The second hypothesis stated that ethnicity will influence comfort in purchasing

clothing decisions for self, frequency of shopping for clothing, frequency of shopping for

clothing for self, frequency of returns, money spent on clothing, and the time spent on a

shopping trip. To assess Hypothesis 2, independent t-tests and chi square statistics

were computed as appropriate. The t-tests presented significant differences between

the two ethnic backgrounds and comfort in purchasing clothing decisions for self (t =

2.94; p < .01), amount money spent on clothing (t = 5.41; p < .001), and the time spent

on a shopping trip (t = 4.21; p < .001). An examination of Table 8 reveals that there

were higher means for African Americans than Caucasian Americans for all of the

shopping behaviors measured.

To assess relationships between ethnicity and shopping behaviors: frequency of

shopping for clothing, frequency of purchasing clothing for self, frequency of shopping

for clothing, and frequency of returns. These segments of the hypothesis were

computed using a chi-square test of independence. Significant relationships were

58

identified between frequency of shopping for clothing (χ2 = 28.85, p < .001), and

frequency of purchasing clothing for self (χ2 = 38.53, p < .001). Independent t-tests for

frequency of returns were computed with ethnicity as the dependent variable. The

difference between the two ethnic groups and frequency of clothing returns was not

significant (Table 9). Therefore Hypothesis 2 was accepted for the shopping behaviors,

comfort in purchasing clothing decisions for self, frequency of shopping for clothing,

frequency of shopping for clothing for self, money spent on clothing, and the time spent

on a shopping trip (Figure 3).

Table 8

The Influence of Ethnicity on Shopping Behaviors: t-test Results

African American Caucasian American

M SD M SD t p

Comfort in purchasing clothing for self

4.42a 0.86 4.20 0.89 2.94 0.0030

Amount of money spent on clothing

$203.00 $188.00 $121.29 $115.64 5.41 0.0001

Amount of time spent on shopping trip

165b 99 132 70 4.21 0.0001

Note: a

Measured on a 5-point, Likert type scale where 1 = extremely uncomfortable and 5 = extremely comfortable.

b Converted to minutes

59

Table 9

The Influence of Ethnicity on Shopping Behaviors: χ² Results

African American

Caucasian American

Χ²

% %

Frequency of shopping for clothing Twice a month or more 67.2 32.8 28.85** About once a month 58.0 42.0 About once every 2 months 50.5 49.5 Once a season (4 times a year) 32.5 64.8 Fewer than 4 times a year. 52.9 47.1

Frequency of purchasing clothing for self Rarely/almost never 29.0 71.0 38.53** Sometimes 35.0 65.0

Most of the time 55.4 44.6 Every time 70.6 29.4

Frequency of returns

None 52.3 47.7 3.57 1-5 53.9 46.1 6-10 40.9 59.1 11-15 61.5 38.5 16 or more 100.00 0.0 Note: **p < 0.01

H3: The Influence of Fashion Leadership

The third hypothesis proposed that fashion leadership is positively correlated with

general leadership, fashion leadership, fashion involvement, shopping enjoyment and

fashion consciousness. To assess Hypothesis 3, Pearson Product Moment Correlations

were computed. The responses for the fashion leadership, general leadership, fashion

involvement, shopping enjoyment and fashion consciousness scales were summed to

create a single value for each variable for each participant (Table 10). Correlation

analysis indicated a slight significant and positive relationship (r = 0.173, p < .001)

between fashion leadership and general leadership. There was a moderate correlation

60

between fashion leadership and both fashion involvement (r = 0.570, p < .001) and

shopping enjoyment (r = 0.519, p < .001). A strong positive correlation was computed (r

= 0.763, p < .001) with fashion leadership and fashion consciousness. These positive

correlations indicate that respondents who were fashion leaders also had higher scores

in general leadership, fashion involvement, shopping enjoyment and fashion

consciousness. Therefore, Hypothesis 3 was accepted for general leadership, fashion

involvement, shopping enjoyment and fashion consciousness (Figure 4).

Table 10

Pearson Product Moment Correlations for Fashion Leadership and General Leadership,

Fashion Involvement, Shopping Enjoyment, Fashion Consciousness, Academic

Classification Level, and Age

Fashion leadership r p

General leadership 0.173 0.0001 Fashion involvement 0.570 0.0001 Shopping enjoyment 0.519 0.0001 Fashion consciousness 0.763 0.0001

61

General Leadership

Fashion Involvement

Shopping Enjoyment

Fashion Consciousness

Fashion Involvement

Shopping Enjoyment

Fashion Consciousness

Age

Classification Level in College

Fashion Leadership

General Leadership

H3a

(r = .1

73, p < .0

01)

H3b

(r = .570, p < .001)

H3c

(r = .519, p < .001)

H3d(r = .763, p < .001)

H4a

(r = .212, p < .001)

H4b(r = .062, p < .001)

H4c(r = .194, p < .001)

H4e

(r = .007, p < .001)

Figure 4. Relationship between leadership variables and fashion personality characteristics and demographics.

H4: General Leadership, Fashion Personality Characteristics and Demographics

The fourth hypothesis stated that general leadership is positively correlated with

fashion involvement, shopping enjoyment, fashion consciousness, academic

classification level, and age. To assess Hypothesis 4, Pearson product moment

correlations were computed. Responses to each of the questions in the fashion

62

involvement, shopping enjoyment and fashion consciousness scales were summed for

each participant (Table 11). A slight positive correlation was computed between general

leadership and fashion involvement (r = 0.212, p < .001) and fashion consciousness (r =

0.194, p < .001). There was a weak positive correlation between general leadership and

shopping enjoyment (r = 0.062 p < .001), and academic classification level of

participants (r = 0.007, p < .001). There was no significant relationship between the

general leadership personality characteristic and age. Therefore, Hypothesis 4 was

accepted only for fashion involvement, shopping enjoyment, fashion consciousness,

and academic classification level (Figure 4).

Table 11

H4: Pearson Product Moment Correlations for General Leadership and Fashion

Involvement, Shopping Enjoyment, Fashion Consciousness, Age, and Academic

Classification Level

General leadership r p

Fashion involvement 0.212 0.0001

Shopping enjoyment 0.062 0.0001

Fashion consciousness 0.194 0.0001

Age 0.027 0.546

Academic classification level 0.007 0.0001

Data from this study strongly indicate that ethnicity can influence fashion

personality characteristics and shopping behaviors. Further, fashion leadership and

general leadership are significantly related to each other, along with other fashion

personality characteristics. In addition to general leadership being significant to ethnicity

it could also have a significant effect on demographics such as age and academic

63

classification level. This information could be very relevant for retailers seeking to reach

these ethnic groups.

64

CHAPTER V

DISCUSSION

Previous research has been conducted to understand the fashion behaviors,

personality characteristics and shopping behaviors of various ethnicities. However, few

studies have compared African Americans with Caucasian Americans within a college

setting to examine and identify the differences between them. None have compared

Caucasian Americans from a traditional university with African American with students

in a Historically Black University.

Several studies supported the finding of the influence of ethnicity on fashion

personality characteristics. However, in most of literature reviewed for this study, the

samples included unequal numbers of African Americans used for comparison with

Caucasian Americans. The present study comprised a sample with a proportionate

amount of African Americans and Caucasian Americans, and the results from this study

could serve as an advancement of previous findings.

Summary of the Study

The purpose of this study was twofold. First, the study compared fashion

personality characteristics and shopping behaviors of African American and Caucasian

American college students. Secondly, this study examined characteristics of leadership

in general, and fashion leadership specifically, on fashion personality characteristics.

The fashion personality characteristics studied included fashion leadership, fashion

involvement, shopping enjoyment, and fashion consciousness.

For this study, ethnicity consisted of “Three significant aspects within the

individual’s environment which contribute to ethnicity--language, culture, and physical

65

appearance” (Shills,1968); fashion personality characteristics consisted of fashion

leadership, fashion involvement, shopping enjoyment and fashion consciousness.

General leadership consisted of an individuals’ believed capability to successfully

accomplish something and influence their peers.

The sample was a non-random convenience sample of African American and

Caucasian American students. Students were surveyed at Texas Southern University, a

Historically Black University, and The University of North Texas a state university in the

southwestern region of the United States. Students who were of other ethnic

backgrounds and older than age 30 were removed from the sample.

Conclusions

The results of this study indicated that ethnicity influences fashion personality

characteristics and shopping behaviors. African Americans in the sample were found to

have higher levels of fashion personality characteristics than Caucasian Americans. The

finding could be due to the fact that fashion personality characteristics often overlapped

one another with their characteristics and traits. Shim and Bickle (1994) found that

those who enjoyed shopping were more innovative and very interested in their roles and

positions. Belleau et al. (2007) suggested that those that possessed high fashion

involvement levels had fashion leadership characteristics because they sought new

products and followed trends. This provides an explanation for the finding that those

who have a high level of one fashion personality characteristic may also be found to

possess a high level of another fashion personality characteristic. In this study African

Americans had high levels of fashion leadership, which includes many of the traits of the

other fashion personality characteristics that were examined.

66

The influence of American culture might be another possible explanation for

African Americans’ higher levels of fashion personality characteristics than Caucasian

American levels. Sexton (1972) suggested that African Americans were more innovative

in products that were socially visible in efforts to present themselves as a part of

mainstream America.

Similar to previous studies, the African Americans in this study had higher levels

of fashion leadership than Caucasian Americans. This finding is similar to Goldsmith

and Stith (1989) as they identified that African Americans had higher levels of fashion

innovativeness, fashion opinion leadership, and spending on fashion. This finding is

also relative to Dixon’s (2007) finding that fashion leadership was the factor that

influenced dress and appearance the most among African American college students.

African Americans had higher levels of fashion involvement than did Caucasian

Americans. The differences of fashion involvement in the ethnic groups were similar to

Summers et al. (1992) in that shopping involvement levels were higher in non-

Caucasian Americans than Caucasian Americans. Similarly, Gravely (1999) found that

African American males were more involved with fashion than Caucasian American

males.

The levels of shopping enjoyment differed between the ethnicities. As with

Fischer (1982), African Americans were found to enjoy shopping more than Caucasian

Americans. Dixon (2007) also identified that African American college students enjoyed

shopping. Fashion consciousness was found to be different between the two ethnic

groups; the findings that African Americans were more fashion conscious than

Caucasian Americans was similar to findings of Morgan (2005).

67

Ethnicity was an influence on shopping behaviors in this study as differences

were also found between the two ethnic groups. The shopping behaviors studied were:

comfort in purchasing clothing decisions for self, frequency of shopping for clothing,

frequency of shopping for clothing for self, frequency of returns, money spent on

clothing, and the time spent on a shopping trip, and frequency of returns. African-

Americans shopped more often, spent more time shopping, purchased more for

themselves, and spent more on clothing than Caucasian Americans. The finding that

African Americans spent more on clothing than Caucasian Americans was similar to the

findings of Alexis, (1962), Sexton (1972), and Fontes and Fan (2006).

Caucasian Americans purchased and returned more items in the last three

months than African Americans and the reason for return was also different for the two

ethnicities. Caucasian Americans were more likely to return clothing items because they

did not go with their present wardrobe or they were the wrong style for their body type.

African Americans were more likely to return clothes because they did not try on the

clothing items they purchased before buying. Caucasian Americans shopped more

often than African Americans, although African Americans purchased clothing for

themselves on shopping trips more than Caucasian Americans. African Americans

spent more time and money while on shopping trips than did Caucasian Americans.

One possible explanation for the difference in the shopping behaviors could be due to

the finding that African-Americans were more comfortable with making their own

clothing purchase decisions than Caucasian-Americans; the comfort level of purchasing

clothing for themselves was also higher in African Americans than in Caucasian

Americans.

68

Results from this study also indicated that there was a relationship between

fashion leadership and general leadership. Previous studies were found to support the

relationship between fashion leadership and general leadership. Wells and Tigert (1971)

hypothesized that personality traits are closely related to the behavior under

investigation, which could be a possible explanation for the relationship between fashion

leadership and general leadership. The findings from the present study supported Wells

and Tigert’s (1971) suggestion that attitudinal measurements are an effective tool in

understanding the differences between leaders and followers in product usage. This

finding was also similar to Behling (1992) in that general leadership traits were found in

fashion leaders, Peak (1986) found that self-confidence was a personality trait found

within those with high interest in clothing and Belleau et al. (2007) found that fashion

leaders were more self-confident than fashion followers.

The fashion leadership and general leadership variables were also found to be

significantly related to all of the fashion personality characteristics. Previous studies

provided rationale in support of the findings regarding the relationships between general

leadership and fashion personality characteristics. The above-mentioned thesis of Wells

and Tigert (1971) might be an explanation for the significant relationship between

fashion leadership and the other fashion personality characteristics used in this study

(fashion involvement, shopping enjoyment, and fashion consciousness). Positive

correlations indicated that respondents who were fashion leaders also had higher

scores in general leadership, fashion involvement, shopping enjoyment, and fashion

consciousness. In regard to fashion leadership and fashion involvement, the

relationship was significant, as indicated in Belleau et al. (2007), Belleau, Nowlin,

69

Summers, and Xu (2001), Bakewell and Mitchell (2003) and Bakewell, Mitchell, and

Rothwell (2006).

General leadership was positively correlated with fashion involvement, shopping

enjoyment, fashion consciousness, academic classification level, and age. A positive

relationship was also found between general leadership and fashion involvement and

fashion consciousness. There was a weak positive relationship between general

leadership and shopping enjoyment, and academic classification level of participants.

There was no significant relationship between the general leadership personality

characteristic and age. These findings indicate that those with higher levels of

leadership were also more involved in fashion, were more fashion conscious, and

enjoyed shopping. These findings also suggest that as the college students progressed

during their academic careers, their level of general leadership increased. However,

general leadership could not be determined by age.

This study found that general leadership was found have the strongest

relationship to fashion the personality characteristics, fashion involvement, and fashion

consciousness. The finding that fashion involvement was related to general leadership

could be due to the explanation of personality traits being related to the behavior (Wells

& Tigert, 1971). Since fashion involvement is related to fashion leadership, it is possible

that those with high levels of fashion leadership have higher levels of involvement in

fashion and may also possess general leadership abilities. The finding that fashion

consciousness was related to general leadership was similar to Tatzel’s (1982) findings

that fashion conscious consumers possess leadership traits such as being competitive,

self-assertive, adventurous, and self-confident.

70

General leadership was found to be positively related to college classification.

The Hollenbeck and Hall (2004) definition of self-confidence provides a possible

explanation for the differences in demographics. The researchers explained that self-

confidence is the capability to accomplish something and one’s perception of that ability.

It is possible that as students matriculate through college they become more confident

in their abilities, as they can use abilities gained throughout their college experience to

complete new tasks (Hollenbeck & Hall, 2004). Age was not found to be a determinant

of self-confidence. This might be because the age of a student can vary in academic

classification level, and the suggestions from previous studies that provided definitions

of self-confidence. Dixon’s (2007) study indicated that self-confidence, which was

measured to identify general leadership, is the understanding of a person’s relation to

self. Hollenbeck and Hall (2004) described self-confidence as the ability to successfully

accomplish something and of one’s perception of oneself, and is task-specific and is

depended on actual experience. The participants in this study might vary in experiences

of successfully accomplishing something, and depending on a participant’s perception

of himself or herself, he or she might have higher or lower levels of self-confidence.

This study advances the scientific research through the comparison of the

fashion behaviors and personality characteristics of African Americans and Caucasian

Americans college students. It supports the hypotheses that ethnicity influences fashion

personality characteristics, shopping behaviors, and general leadership personality trait.

This research also lends a depiction of the personality characteristics and shopping

behaviors of these ethnic groups. In addition this research also provides an

understanding for the relationship between fashion personality characteristics and

71

general leadership. Therefore, ethnicity can be used to indentify influence of fashion

personality characteristics and shopping behaviors among other ethnic groups and the

ethnic groups can be examined for differences between them.

Implications

This study provides useful insight about the similarities and differences in fashion

personality characteristics, general leadership traits and shopping behaviors between

African American and Caucasian American college students. In addition, the findings

from the relationships between the fashion personality characteristics and general

leadership also provide key information about this segment. The findings from this study

regarding this segment of consumers can be helpful to retailers, marketers, and the

scientific research community.

The relationship found between ethnicity and fashion personality characteristics

could be quite valuable to retailers, marketers, and the scientific research community.

African Americans scored higher on the fashion personality characteristics than

Caucasian Americans and marketing efforts can reflect this in strategies used by

marketers and retail companies. For example, marketers could use cues in

advertisements about their products assist in one’s level of fashion leadership and

maintaining their fashion consciousness. Also, retailers should consider enhancing the

shopping experience since African Americans were found to have higher levels of

shopping enjoyment than Caucasian Americans. This could be done by properly training

frontline employees that interact with this segment and implementing new approaches

to enhance their enjoyment and/or pleasure while shopping. In addition efforts could be

used to further engage highly fashion involved African Americans within the shopping

72

process for fashion apparel. Because Caucasian Americans scored lower than African

Americans, retailers and marketing companies should possibly consider developing

different campaigns to reach the two ethnicities when targeting them. At the very least,

retailers and marketers should examine the difference and similarities between the two

ethnic groups.

Retailers and marketers could also benefit from the findings of the relationship

found between ethnicity and shopping behaviors. Since the motivation for shopping

consisted of the majority of the sample being motivated to shop for clothing because

they wanted something new and taking advantage of sales, retailers and marketers

could respond through various strategies. Retailers could focus on upholding marketing

efforts to help this segment identify new merchandise and to inform them of current and

upcoming sales. Strategies and selling techniques should also be implemented to

maximize the shopping trip since the majority of the segment shops about once every

two months or less frequent. These strategies should also be developed since

Caucasian Americans were found to spend less time on a shopping trip and purchase

less for themselves than African Americans. Perhaps the difference could be due to the

finding that African-Americans were more comfortable with making their own clothing

purchase decisions than Caucasian-Americans, if so it should be identified why

differences exist within the two ethnic groups comfort level.

Marketers should consider combining fashion leadership with the remaining

fashion personality characteristics in promotions. As this might assist in communicating

to fashion leaders that purchasing a particular fashion apparel item allows them to fulfill

the other fashion personality characteristics they possess. General leadership within

73

this segment could be addressed through by utilizing marketing strategies that convey

leadership or that a particular fashion apparel item will help them to express the

personality trait visually.

Within the scientific community researchers conducting research regarding this

fashion and/or related topics also have much to consider. For example, it must be

recognized that Historically Black Colleges and Universities have strong numbers of

potential sample populations of African Americans. However, this channel for obtaining

African American sample populations might not be utilized because of the limited

research agendas of Historically Black Colleges and Universities in regard to the social

sciences. Teaching has been the main focus on campuses of Historically Black

Colleges and Universities, as faculty typically have heavy teaching responsibilities and

limited time for research.

Recommendations for Future Studies

Future studies could be expanded through replicating the current study with a

larger sample of students from both historically black universities and state universities.

This would allow results to be more generalized to the population of African American

and Caucasian American college students.

Influences within the settings of historically black colleges and universities and

state universities should also be examined. This concept could identify whether the

factors that exist within the different locations influence fashion personality

characteristics, general leadership and shopping behaviors.

Including more geographical locations could help to identify whether the

differences between African Americans and Caucasian Americans exist in other parts of

74

the country. A method that could be used is to examine the top cities or states within

America that have the highest populations of African Americans and Caucasian

Americans. Identifying the fashion personality characteristics of individuals within these

ethnicities could assist in simplifying marketing efforts. Demographic variables such as

age, income levels, and education levels should also be expanded. This would allow

marketers to develop well-built and accurate profiles of these two ethnicities and better

serve them. Additional research could be conducted to further identify differences

among other ethnicities, including Caucasian Americans, African Americans, Asian

Americans, and Hispanic Americans. A replication of this study could be done with the

inclusion of other ethnic groups yet they are of the same race. For example the study

could consider those who are Black but may not consider themselves to be African

American or those who are Caucasian American but may not consider themselves to be

Caucasian American.

75

APPENDIX A

LETTER TO PARTICIPANTS

76

Fashion Leadership and General Leadership

Dear Participant,

The purpose of this research study is to investigate fashion leadership and general

leadership among college students. Specifically, we are interested in your attitudes

toward fashion and how you perceive yourself to be a leader. Your participation is

entirely voluntary. Please be assured that all of your responses are anonymous, and

they will be reported in the aggregate for research purposes only.

You must be 18 years of age to participate in this study. If you choose to participate,

please do not provide your name or contact information because responses are

anonymous. No questions are asked that would pose any foreseeable physical,

psychological, or social risks. All questions are important, so please answer all of them.

The estimated time of completing this survey is seven minutes. Your completion of

the survey serves as your consent to participate in the study. However, if at any time

during your participation in this study you wish to stop, please feel free to do so. There

are no penalties for not participating.

Completion of the survey will serve as your consent to participate. If you have any

questions or concerns about the survey, please contact Ms. Davette Angelo at ---- or Dr.

Tammy Kinley at ---- or by telephone at ---------. Thank you.

Sincerely,

Davette Angelo

Tammy Kinley, Ph.D.

This research project has been reviewed and approved by the University of North Texas

77

Committee for the Protection of Human Subjects Contact the UNT IRB with any

questions regarding your rights as a research subject.

78

APPENDIX B

LETTER FROM UNIVERSITY OF NORTH TEXAS

INSTITUTIONAL REVIEW BOARD

79

80

APPENDIX C

LETTER FROM TEXAS SOUTHERN UNIVERSITY

81

TEXAS SOUTHERN UNIVERSITY

3100 CLEBURNE AVENUE • HOUSTON, TEXAS 77004 • 713-313-4301

Committee for the Protection of Human Subjects

June 03, 2009 Davette Angelo School of Merchandising & Hospitality Management University of North Texas

We are pleased to inform you that you may conduct your research entitled "YOU

ARE WHAT YOU WEAR:THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN FASHION LEADERSHIP AND GENERAL

LEADERSHIP AMONG AFRICAN AMERICANS AND CAUCASIAN AMERICANS.” Based on the documents provided to the Texas Southern University (TSU) Committee for the Protection of Human Subjects (CPHS), a careful review of the proposal by the

committee gives approval of the proposed research. This approval is extended to you for one year. Should you make changes in the methodology as it affects human subjects at TSU you must inform the committee. Should data collection proceed past one year, you must submit a new application to the committee.

Thank you for your cooperation with the committee and we wish you well with your research project.

PLEASE NOTE: (1) All subjects must receive a copy of the informed consent document. If you are using a consent document that

requires participants’ signatures, signed copies can only be retained for a minimum of 3 years or 5 years for external supported projects. Signed consents from student projects will be retained by the faculty advisor. Faculty is responsible for retaining signed

consents for their own projects; however, if the faculty leaves the university, access must be made available to TSU CPHS in the event of an agency audit. (2) Research investigators will promptly report to the CPHS any injuries or other unanticipated problems involving

risks to subjects and others.

Tequerio Banks Texas Southern University Office of Research Hannah Hall Suite 230 3100 Cleburne Street Houston, TX 77004 Phone: 713-313-4301 Fax: 713-313-7598 E-mail: [email protected] http://www.tsu.edu/research

82

REFERENCE LIST

Alexis, M. (1962). Some Negro-White differences in consumption. American Journal of Economics and Sociology, 21(1), 11-28.

Alpert, M. I. (1972). Personality and the determinants of product choice. JMR, Journal of

Marketing Research 9(000001), 89. Bakewell, C., & Mitchell, V.W. (2003). Generation Y female consumer decision-making

styles. International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management, 31(2/3). Bakewell, C., Mitchell, V.W., & Rothwell, M.. (2006). UK Generation Y male fashion

consciousness. Journal of Fashion Marketing and Management, 10(2), 169-180. Barth, F. (1969). Ethnic groups and boundaries. Norway: Scandinavian University

Press. Beaudoin, P., Moore, M. A., & Goldsmith, R. E. (1998). Young fashion leaders' and

followers' attitudes toward American and imported apparel. Journal of Product and Brand Management, 7(3), 193-207.

Behling, D. (1992). Three and a half decades of fashion adoption research: What have

we learned? Clothing and Textiles Research Journal, 10(2), 34-41. Belleau, B. D., Nowlin, K., Summers, T. A., & Xu, J. Y. (2001). Fashion leaders' and

followers' attitudes toward exotic leather apparel products. Journal of Fashion Marketing and Management, 5(2), 133-144.

Burkey, Richard M. (1978). Ethnic and racial groups: The dynamics of dominance.

Menlo Park, Calif.: Benjamin/Cummings. Cassill, N. L., & Drake, M. F. (1987). Apparel selection criteria to female consumers'

lifestyle. Clothing and Textiles Research Journal, 6(1), 20-28. Cox, A. D., Cox, D., & Anderson, R. D. (2005). Reassessing the pleasures of store

shopping. Journal of Business Research, 58(3), 250-259. Dalrymple D.J., Robertson, T. S., & Yoshino, M. Y. (1971). Consumption behavior

across ethnic categories. California Management Review (pre-1986), 14(000001), 65.

Darden, W. R. & Reynolds. F. D. (1974). Backward profiling of male innovators. JMR,

Journal of Marketing Research (pre-1986), 11(000001), 79. Dardis, R., Derrick, F., & Lehfeld, A. (1981). Clothing demand in the United States: A

cross-sectional analysis. Home Economics Research Journal, 10(2), 212-221.

83

Delener, N. & Neelankavil, J. P. (1990, June/July) Informational sources and media usage: A comparison between Asian and Hispanic subcultures. Journal of Advertising Research, 30(3), 45-52.

Dixon, D. L. (2007). The influence of values and other social and psychological factors

on the dress and appearance of African American college students (Doctoral dissertation, Louisiana State University, 2007). Dissertations & Theses: A&I Database. (Publication No. AAT 3277102).

Eicher, J. B. (1995). Dress and ethnicity: Change across space and time. Oxford:

Washington, DC: Berg. Elimimian, J. U. (2007). Psychoanalysis of ethnic consumers and similarities of

consumption. Innovative Marketing, 3(3), 40-46,102. Elimimian, J. U. (1982). Ethnicity is a guide to leisure activity choice. Marketing News,

16(5), 1-6. Evans, M. (1989). Consumer behaviour toward fashion. European Journal of Marketing.

23(7), 7-16. Fairhurst, A. E., Good, L. K., & Gentry, J. W. (1989). Fashion involvement: An

instrument validation procedure. Clothing and Textiles Research Journal, 7(3), 10-14.

Fan, J. X. (1998). Ethnic differences in household expenditure patterns. Family and

Consumer Sciences Research Journal, 26(4), 371-400. Feather, B. L., Herr, D. G., & Ford, S. (1997). Black and white female athletes'

perceptions of their bodies and garment fit. Clothing and Textiles Research Journal, 15(2), 125-128.

Fisher, C. (1996, September). Black, hip, and primed (to shop). American

Demographics, 18(9), 52. Fontes, A., & Fan, J. X. (2006). The effects of ethnic identity on household budget

allocation to status conveying goods. Journal of Family and Economic Issues, 27(4), 643-663.

Forney, J. C., & Rabolt, N. J. (1986). Ethnic identity: Its relationship to ethnic and

contemporary dress. Clothing and Textiles Research Journal, 4(2), 1-8. Frank, J. (2008). Big bucks on campus. Marketing Management, 17(5), 4.

84

Goldsmith, R. E., Frieden, J. B., & Kilsheimer, J. C. (1993). Social values and female fashion leadership: A cross-cultural study. Psychology & Marketing, 10(5), 399-412.

Stith, M. T. & Goldsmith, R.E. (1989). Race, sex, and fashion innovativeness: A

replication. Psychology & Marketing, 6(4), 249. Gordon, M. M. (1964). Assimilation in American life. New York, New York: Oxford

University Press. Gravely, T.M. (1999). Apparel buying behaviors of black males and white males when

purchasing men's business suits. Master's thesis, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, United States—Virginia.

Gutman, J., Mills, M. K. (1982). Fashion life style, self-concept, shopping orientation,

and store patronage: An intergrative analysis. Journal of Retailing, 58(2), 64-86. Hayhoe, C. R., Lauren, J. L., Turner, P. R., Bruin, M. J., & Lawrence, F. C. (2000).

Differences in spending habits and credit use of college students. Journal of Consumer Affairs, 34(1), 113-132.

Hennon, C.B., & Brubaker, T.H. (1988). Rural families: Characteristics and

conceptualization. In R. Marotz-Badden, C. B. Hennon, & T. H. Brubaker (Eds.), Families in rural America: Stress, adaptation and revitalization (pp. 1-9). St. Paul, MN: National Council on Family Relations.

Hollenbeck, G. P., & Hall, D. T. (2004, August). Self-confidence and leader

performance. Organizational Dynamics, 33(3), 254-269. Howard, J.A., Sheth, J.N. (1969). The theory of buyer behavior. New York, New York:

John Wiley & Sons, (p. 83-114). Johnson, K., & Minjeong, K. (2009). Identifying characteristics of consumers who

frequently return apparel. Journal of Fashion Marketing and Management, 13(1), 37-48.

Joseph, S. (2006). Ethnicity, personality and values: Exploring the consumer exodus

from department to discount stores. Doctoral dissertation, Florida State University, Tallahassee, Florida.

Josiam, B. M., Kinley, T. R., & Kim, Y. K. (2005). Involvement and the tourist shopper:

Using the involvement construct to segment the American tourist shopper at the mall. Journal of Vacation Marketing, 11(2), 135-154.

Kang, M., & Johnson, K. (2009). Identifying characteristics of consumers who frequently

return apparel. Journal of Fashion Marketing and Management, 13(1), 37-48.

85

Kara, A., & Kara, N. R. (1996). Ethnicity and consumer choice: A study of Hispanic

decision processes across different acculturation levels. Journal of Applied Business Research, 12(2), 22.

Kim, J. E. (2005). Understanding consumers' online shopping and purchasing

behaviors. (Doctoral dissertation, Oklahoma State University, 2005). Dissertations & Theses: A&I Database. (Publication No. AAT 3153676).

Kim, Y. K., & Han, S. H. (2000). Perceived images of retail stores and brands:

Comparison among three ethnic consumer groups. Journal of Family and Consumer Sciences, 92(3), 58-61.

Kinley, T. (in press). Fit and shopping preferences by clothing benefits sought. Journal

of Fashion Marketing and Management. Kretsedemas, P. (2008). Redefining `Race' in North America. Current Sociology, 56(6),

826-844. Lamb, T. R. (1993). Shopping references used by American men for apparel purchase

decisions. Doctoral dissertation, Texas Tech University, 1993. Dissertations & Theses: A&I Database, Publication No. AAT 9325743).

Lee, E. J., Fairhurst, A., & Dillard, S. (2002). Usefulness of ethnicity in international

consumer marketing. Journal of International Consumer Marketing, 14(4), 25-48. Lumpkin, J.R., & Darden, W. R. (1982). Relating television preference viewing to

shopping orientations, lifestyles, and demographics; the examination of perceptual and preference dimensions of television programming. Journal of Advertising (pre-1986), 11(000004), 56.

Manrai, L. A., Lascu, D.-N., Manrai, A. K., Babb, H. W. (2001). A cross-cultural

comparison of style in Eastern European emerging markets. International Marketing Review, 18(3), 270-285.

Marmorstein, H., Grewal, D., & Fishe, R. P. H.. (1992). The value of time spent in price-

comparison shopping: Survey and experimental evidence. Journal of Consumer Research, 19(1), 52. Retrieved March 19, 2009, from ABI/INFORM Global database. (Document ID: 576308).

McKinney, L. N., Traylor-Legette, D., Kincade, D. H., & Holloman, L. O. (2004, October).

Selected social factors and the clothing buying behaviour patterns of black college consumers. International Review of Retail, Distribution and Consumer Research, 14(4), 389-406.

Miller, C. (1993a, September 13). Research on black consumers; Marketers with much

86

at stake step up their efforts. Marketing News, 27(19). Miller, C. (1993b, January 18). Study: Shopping patterns vary widely among minorities.

Marketing News, 2(11). Moore M., & Carpenter, J. M. (2008). Intergenerational perceptions of market cues

among US apparel consumers. Journal of Fashion Marketing and Management, 12(3), 323-337.

Monsuwe, T., Dellaert, B., & Ruyter, K. (2004). What drives consumers to shop online:

A literature review, International Journal of Service Industry Management, 15(1), 102-21.

Morgan, D. S. (2005). The influence of hip-hop on the materialism and fashion

consciousness of youths and young adults. Doctoral dissertation, Nova Southeastern University, Florida. Retrieved January 5, 2010, from ABI/INFORM Global. (Publication No. AAT 3164825).

Nesbit, M., & Weinstein, A. (1986, July). How to size up your customers. American

Demographics, 8(7), 34. Norris, D., (2006, October 10). Use proper imagery to reflect total segment. Marketing

News, 21, 21. Nunnally, J. (1978). Psychometric theory. New York: McGraw-Hill. O'Cass, A. (2004). Fashion clothing consumption: Antecedents and consequences of

fashion clothing involvement. European Journal of Marketing, 38(7), 869-882. O'Guinn, T., & Faber, R. (1989). Compulsive buying: A phenomenological exploration.

Journal of Consumer Research, 16(2), 147-157. Ogden, Ogden, & Schau (2004) Exploring the impact of culture and acculturation on

consumer purchase decisions: Toward a microcultural perspective. Academy of Marketing Science Review, 3.

O'Neal, G.S. (1998, January). African American Aesthetic of Dress: Current

Manifestations. Clothing and Textiles Research Journal, 16(4), 167-175. Paek, S. L. (1986). Effect of garment style on the perception of personal traits. Clothing

and Textiles Research Journal, 5(1), 10-16. Park, E. J., Kim, E. Y., & Forney, J. C. (2006). A structural model of fashion-oriented

impulse buying behavior. Journal of Fashion Marketing and Management, 10(4), 433-446.

87

Percy, L., Ketchum, MacLeod, & Grove. (1976). A look at personality profiles and the

personality-attitude-behavior link in predicting consumer behavior. Advances in Consumer Research, 3(1), 119-124.

Sexton, D. E. (1972, October). Black buyer behavior. Journal of Marketing, 36(3), 36-39. Shen, D., & Dickson, M. A. (2001). Consumers' acceptance of unethical clothing

consumption activities: Influence of cultural identification, ethnicity, and Machiavellianism. Clothing and Textiles Research Journal, 19(2), 76-87.

Shim, S., & Bickle, M. C. (1994). Benefit segments of the female apparel market:

Psychographics, shopping orientations, and demographics. Clothing and Textiles Research Journal, 12(20), 1-12.

Song, K., Fiore A. M., & Park, J. (2007). Telepresence and fantasy in online apparel

shopping experience. Journal of Fashion Marketing and Management, 11(4), 553-570.

Sparks, D. L., & Tucker, W. T. (1971). A multivariate analysis of personality and product

use. Journal of Marketing Research, 8, 67-70. Sproles, G. B. (1979). Fashion: Consumer behavior toward dress. Minneapolis:

Burgess. Stajkovic, A. D., & Luthans, F. (1998). Social cognitive theory and self-efficacy: Going

beyond traditional motivational and behavioral approaches. Organizational Dynamics, 26(4), 62-74.

Stanfield, J.H. & Dennis, R.M. (1993). Race and ethnicity in research methods.

Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications. Stith, M. T. & Goldsmith, R. E. (1989). Race, sex and fashion. Psychology & Marketing,

6(4), 249-262. Stone, E. (2007). In fashion: Fun! Fame! Fortune! New York: Fairchild. Sullivan, P., & Heitmeyer, J. (2008). Looking at Gen Y shopping preferences and

intentions: Exploring the role of experience and apparel involvement. International Journal of Consumer Studies, 32(3), 285-295.

Summers, J. O. (1970). The identity of women's clothing fashion opinion leaders.

Journal of Marketing Research, 7(2), 178-185. Summers, T. A., Belleau, B. D., & Wozniak, P. J. (1992). Fashion and shopping

perceptions, demographics, and store patronage. Clothing and Textiles Research

88

Journal, 11(1), 83-91.

Summers, T. A., Belleau, B. D., Xu, Y. J. (2006). Predicting purchase intention of a controversial luxury apparel product. Journal of Fashion Marketing and Management, 10(4), 405-419.

Tat, P. K.. (1984). Opinion leadership in black female fashion buying behavior. Mid-Atlantic Journal of Business, 23(1), 11.

Tatzel, M. (1982). Skill and motivation in clothes shopping: Fashion-conscious, independent, anxious, and apathetic consumers. Journal of Retailing, 58(4), 90-97.

Tigert, D.J., Ring, L.R., King, C.W. (1976), Fashion involvement and buying behavior: a methodological study. Advances in Consumer Research, 3(1) 481-84.

U.S. Census Bureau. (2000). Race definitions. 2000 census of population. Retrieved on December 1, 2009, from http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/meta/ long_68176.htm

Wells, W. D., & Tigert, D. J. (1971, August). Activities, interests and opinions. Journal of Advertising Research, 11(4), 27-35.

Williams, J. D. (1995). Race and ethnicity in research methods. JMR, Journal of Marketing Research, 32(2), 239.

Wilson, M., & Field, K. (2007, March). Defining Gen Y. Chain Store Age, 83(3), 35-39.

Zaichowsky J. L. (1985). Measuring the involvement construct. Journal of Consumer Research, 12(3), 341-352.

Zaichowsky , J. L. (1986). Conceptualizing involvement. Journal of Advertising, 15(2), 4-34.